w 



II 




Class. 
Book. 



V!)\5 



.35^ 



"^: 



* CLAIM 

OF 

CHARLES F. SIBBALD. 

This is a claim for damages for a trespass committed by the 
government of the United States upon the " lands," " timber," 
" mills," and other property, in Florida, of the claimant, a mer- 
chant of the city of Philadelphia, and is brought before the 
Attorney-General of the United States pursuant to an act of 
Congress passed on the 23d of August, 1842, wherein the 
" third Auditor of the Treasury, under the direction of the 
Attorney-General o{ \he United States, be and is hereby directed 
to ascertain the actual damages which Charles F. Sibbald has 
sustained, and would be entitled to recover, upon the principles 
of law, as applicable to similar cases, by reason of the interfe- 
rence of any agent or agents of the United States, acting by 
their authority, with the use, possession, or enjoyment of his 
lands, timber, mills, or other property, in East Florida, &c." 

These are the clear and emphatic words of the laio, passed 
by Congress, after a most careful, deliberate, and elaborate 
examination of the facts, on a petition made by a ruined citizen 
of the United vStates, appealing to the legislature of his country 
to redress a wrong committed by our own government — in the 
language of the Supreme Court of the United States, " a wrong 
that would be condemned by the whole civilized world, and 
upon which (under a special act of Congress) the government is 
bound to act as between man and man." 6 Peters, 712. 

This claim rests on the following simple facts, as will be here- 
inafter exhibited : — 

The Spanish colonial authorities of East Florida, in 1816, 
pursuant to a Royal order, issued at Madrid, made a grant for 
16,000 acres of land to the claimant, who was then a resident 
of Florida, on the condition that he should erect a Saw-Mill. 
The lands were surveyed by the proper authority, in accord- 
ance with the tenor of the grant, in detached parcels ; and all 
contained valuable timber, such as yellow pine, live oak, red 
cedar, and other woods. Soon after the grant was made, the 
mills, as stipulated, were built, and the land then became the 
absolute property of the claimant. Spain soon after ceded Flo- 
rida to the United Stales, and by treaty stipulations made pro- 



Jk^ 



2 '^^^ 

vision that these grants should remain ratified and confirmed to 
the grantee, who, induced by the great vafue of his grant from 
Spain, continued to improve his lands ; and, to make them pro- 
ductive, erected several veryextensive steam mills upon them, and 
simultaneously made contracts whereby a very large amount from 
his forests was immediately to be converted and paid him for his 
live oak timber. Thus, dependent on the property an immense 
amount was invested by the claimant, relying on the continued 
free use and enjoyment of it, when, in the year 1828, he was 
suddenly interfered with by agents of the United States, acting 
by their authority — his lands claimed as public land, his agents 
and labourers driven from their operations, whereby he was 
thus forced to abandon his mills and other undertakings, until 
the year 1836. In the interval, his mills and other improve- 
ments were totally destroyed by delapidation and decay. 
When at last, in 1836, the Supreme Court of the United States 
confirmed his title to his entire grant, and "adjudged it to be 
valid, by the laws of nations, of Spain, the United States, and 
the stipulations of the treaty between Spain and the United 
States, for the cession of Florida to the latter." 10 Peters, 321, 
322. He now seeks indemnity or reparation only for the actual 
damages or losses of his undertakings, until he shall be rein- 
stated in his business, and not for vague surmises and calcula- 
tions of projected enterprises, or collateral speculations in com- 
merce, &:c. He will establish what our judicial tribunals 
would consider a case of trespass of the most aggravated 
nature, in the illegal interference with those rights which are 
secured to every citizen of this country, by its laws and that 
sacred constitution, which is intended to guarantee the citizen 
in the lawful exercise of his rights, his liberty, and his property. 

This case presents a violation of the constitution, and the 
obligation that exists in the government, to protect the citizen 
in the free use and enjoyment of his property. 

It exhibits the violation of a sacred treaty, where treaty sti- 
pulations had protected the property and private rights that 
have been thus disregarded, invaded, and assailed. 

It exhibits the violation of a contract. " A treaty is a con- 
tract." 6 Peters, 735. 

It is perhaps one of the most important cases of injury, which 
has ever occurred in the civilized world, between the citizen 
and his government. 

Important in its principles — important in its consequences — 
in the extent of the destruction " which has flowed immediately 
and directly from the wrong" — and while we are demanding 
the rights of our citizens from every nation of the earth, whether 



rich or poor, who shall attempt to trespass on them, and while 
they are prompt to make reparation of principal, and sometimes 
even interest exceeding that principal, every citizen of the United 
States, on knowing the facts of this case, would most gladly aid 
to blot out a stain, that must rest on our national honour, until 
ample and full indemnity is here awarded. Let the facts be 
stated, and let the world then judge. 

On the 23d of August, 1842, the legislature passed an act 
*'for the relief" of the claimant. Their views cannot be mis- 
taken. They made a Report of the facts, which was unani- 
mously adopted in both branches of Congress, and which 
accompanied the Bill. There is no reproach or reflection that 
can be cast upon the law-givers of this great "nation, m not pro- 
Q viding amply that full reparation or indemnity shall be awarded. 
-^ They have *^ directed " that every law, and every '^principle of 
'^^ law," which exists " between man and man " shall be applied 
»V to this case. They debated the case, with its enormous amount 
"^ brought to their view, and upon the prominent facts taken from 
'^^ the testimony, and nothing could turn them from their purpose. 
_^ The law that arises, and the measure of damages was most 
-; ably illustrated, in a debate occupying nearly two days of the 
-^ Senate, when its time, and its moments, were even precious, 
J, (within a week of the adjournment,) and the former Attorney- 
General of the United States, pursuant to the law, has given 
instructions to the third Auditor to " direct " the intentions of 
Congress to be carried into execution, but at the same time 
says, " the case is open on its merits." Was this contemplated 
by the law ? It certainly seems directly at variance with it. 
Why did Congress take several years of labour — why did the 
committees examine the facts and merits of the claim — ^why did 
they report the facts to both branches of the legislature, if they 
intended to send this case to one individual, to report upon the 
merits of the claim ? 

Is the Report of a committee of Congress, composed of nine 
members of the House of Representatives, and five of the 
Senate, stating that "they deem the following facts established," 
to be disregarded, and that Report, too, unanimously adopted 
by both branches of the legislature '? and in one branch debated 
for nearly two days. This inquiry is most respectfully submit- 
ted to the Attorney-General, and with a confidence that he will 
perfectly harmonize, with the claimant, upon this point, but still 
let an exposition be made of the facts, according to the testimo- 
ny, so that he shall be the better enabled to judge as to what 
further " directions " shall be necessary at his hands, either on 



matters of law, or matters of fact, to carry into effect the inten- 
tions of the legislature. 

First, however, examine the report of the House of Represen- 
tatives, and which also was unanimously adopted in the Senate. 
This exhibits "the facts" of the case, according to the views of 
the law givers of this country. 

27th Congress, 

2d Session. Rep. No. 473. Ho. or Reps- 

CHARLES F. SIBBALD. 

[To accompany bill H. R. No. 323.] 

April 1, 1842. 

Mr. ToMLiNsoN, from the Committee of Claims, made the fol- 
lowing 

REPORT: 

The Committee of Claims, to whom was referred the memorial 
of Charles F. Sibbald, together with divers documents and 
testimony communicated from the Treasury Department, with 
previous reports made thereon, have had the same under con- 
sideration, and submit the following report : 

It appears that the petition of said Sibbald was submitted to 
this committee, at the 2d session of the 24th Congress, (in 1837,) 
wherein he sets forth that he was a merchant in Philadelphia, 
and was possessed of a large and valuable landed estate in East 
Florida, under a grant from the Spanish Government ; that, for 
the purpose of making the same productive and profitable, he had 
erected extensive steam mills thereon, and had also made ex- 
tensive contracts for supplying timber of various kinds ; that, 
while thus pursuing his plans, and in the peaceable and success- 
ful use and enjoyment of his property, he was dispossessed of 
the same by orders from the Executive Departments of this 
Government, and thereby his plans were frustrated and he was 
overwhelmed in ruin ; that he was kept out of the use and pos- 
session of his estate for many years, and finally he was restored 
to the possession thereof by the decision of the Supreme Court 
of the United States in 1836. For the losses and damages sus- 
tained by thus being prevented from the use of his property, he 
claims remuneration from Congress. 

This petition was accompanied with numerous documents 
and correspondence with several of the Departments. In the 
early investigation of this case, application was made, by the 
Committee of Claims, to the Treasury and Navy Departments, 



for proof of these alleged aggressions, or for the orders and in- 
structions which had emanated therefrom to the Government 
agents in relation thereto. 

Numerous documents were obtained, and, after due considera- 
tion, on the 3d of March, 1837, Mr. Whittlesey, from the then 
Committee of Claims, made a report, setting forth a concise 
statement of the facts, as they then appeared, and concluding 
with certain resolutions, which were concurred in by the House, 
authorizing the Secretary of the Treasury to take testimony so 
as to develope fully the whole facts, and concluding that " it 
was deemed inexpedient to make any decision as to the liability 
of the United States until the facts in the case became known." 
Pursuant to said resolutions, interrogatories were prepared by 
the Department, and the petitioner and witnesses, among whom 
were divers officers of the Government, were carefully examined 
by the District Attornies at the several points of examination, 
and by the Consul of the United States in Cuba. This testimo- 
ny was returned to Congress on the 7th February, 1838, but 
from its extent, it was found impracticable to give it such an ex- 
amination as was requisite, in justice to the United States, or to 
the petitioner. It was, therefore, on the 2d July, 1838, under 
a resolution of the House, referred to the Solicitor and first and 
second Controllers of the Treasury Department, whose report 
thereon may be found in document. No. 238, of the 3d session 
25th Congress." 

" The whole case has again come up for consideration before 
the committee, and, from the examination they have been ena- 
bled to bestow upon it, they deem the following facts estab- 
lished." 

" That thepetitioner was the owner, and entitled to the full, 
free and uninterrupted use and enjoyment of his landed estate in 
Florida at the time of the cession of that Territory to the United 
States ; that he so continued the owner, and in quiet and peace- 
able possession thereof, until he was disturbed, as is hereinafter 
noticed : that his lands were well supplied with yellow pine* 
timber, red cedar, and live oak, in detached parcels ; that he had 
erected extensive steam saw mills to saw his pine timber ; had 
made extensive contracts with one Samuel Grice, and subse- 
quently with the Navy Department, for a supply of live oak, 
thus to bring into profitable use divers portions of these lands ; 
and had in connexion with these operations, other business to a 
large extent ; that the officers of the United States having in 
charge the preservation of the timber on the public l^nds in that 
Territory, and the prevention of trespasses thereon, acting un- 
der orders from the Treasury and Navy Departments, deemed 



and treated the lands of the petitioner as public lands, directly 
interfered and prevented him, or those acting for him, from cut- 
ting or using his own timber, either for supplying his mills or 
fulfilling his live oak contracts ; that being thus prevented from 
the lawful use and enjoyment of his property, his credit, based 
upon its value and his ready resources therefrom, became im- 
paired, his business affairs (which were very extensive) became 
embarrassed, and after praiseworthy efforts to relieve himself 
from his pecuniary difficulties, he was compelled to yield to the 
pressure of the circumstances surrounding him, and throw him- 
self upon the mercy of his creditors. His creditors immediate- 
ly sued out attachments against him, and his mills, erected at an 
immense expense, and his other property in Florida, were taken 
possession of by the United States' Marshal, at the suit of his 
creditors, in whose hands they have perished by dilapidation 
and decay." 

" It is proper here to remark, that there is no direct evidence 
to sustain the allegations of the petitioner that the agents of the 
government directly interfered with the cutting of pine timber 
upon his lands for the supply of his mills after the 20th June, 
1829, until his title to his land was fully confirmed by the Su- 
preme Court of the United States, in 1836; yet, as they had di- 
rectly and positively interfered prior to this time, and threaten- 
ed the employment of military force to enforce obedience to their 
authority, and as the same orders and instructions under which 
they then assumed to act, were continued, and were refused to 
be relaxed on a direct application made by the petitioner to the 
Navy Department for that purpose, the petitioner had good rea- 
son to suppose, and did suppose, and acted in view thereof, that 
no use of the timber on said land, for any purpose whatever, 
would be permitted until the final confirmation of his title by 
the Supreme Court." 

" The orders and instructions under which the government 
agents acted were made to extend to all unconfirmed Spanish 
grants, and the construction put upon them by the agents seems 
to have been concurred in and confirmed by the Executiv^e De- 
partments, as they were fully advised of the conduct of their 
agents in the premises, and repeatedly and earnestly called upon 
by the petitioner to modify their instructions, and to interfere 
and prevent the loss and damage which would result to him 
therefrom. They were issued, doubtless, for the laudable ob- 
ject of protecting the public lands from injury and spoliation, 
especially of the live oak, so necessary for the navy. Still, how- 
ever, if in thus protecting the interest of the United States, an 
individual, like the petitioner, has been seriously injured, the 



obligation to make him reparation is not weakened thereby. 
The acts of the authorized agent or agents being approved by 
the government, it must be considered their act, and the injury, 
if any, to the petitioner, must be responded to by them." 

" In this view^ of the case, the committee have found no diffi- 
culty in coming to the conclusion that the damages which the 
petitioner actually sustained by reason of the interference of 
the government, by their agents, with the use, possession or en- 
joyment of his property in Florida, when ascertained upon 
principles of law and equity, according to a true construction 
of the testimony submitted, should be paid to him ; and with 
this view, they report a bill directing the Secretary of the 
Treasury to ascertain such damages, and when ascertained, to 
allow and pay him the amount." 

This is the report, which accompanied the bill, which was 
passed by the House of Representatives of the United States, 
and which followed it to the Senate, where also it was unani- 
mously adopted, and after a debate of nearly two days' dura- 
tion, when the entire grounds of the claim were extensively, and 
with much ability, argued, and the law that arises on it. It 
was passed and became a law of the land on the 23d of August, 
1842, by the approval of the President of the United States. 

It can be stated without the fear of contradiction, that the 
only difference of opinion on the debate in the Senate arose 
from a laudable purpose of a few Senators, founded from a full 
knowledge of the magnitude of the claim, which in consequence 
of its extent or amount, they preferred to be first audited, and 
afterwards to provide the necessary appropriation for its pay- 
ment, while a very large majority, satisfied of its merits and its 
justice, contended that it should at once be submitted, audited, 
and paid by the Treasury Department. In the House of Rep- 
resentatives it passed unanimously. It is therefore obvious that 
Congress legislated with a full view and knowledge of the ex- 
tent of the claim. They certainly considered the merits of the 
claim settled, and intended it to go to the Departments only 
that the amount due upon the respective items of claim might 
be determined. 

It certainly could not have been contemplated by Congress 
that the merits of this claim, (that is to say, of it being in their 
view a clear case of injury,) should be examined by the Audi- 
tor, else why do they report such "facts " — why not have sent 
it there at once. But let us look at the proceedings of the pre- 
vious Congress, and examine the bill passed in the Senate, 
unanimously, and sent to the House, and unanimously adopted 



8 

by the committee there, as tfie letter from the chairman will so 
clearly exhibit. 

Does not this bill clearly show that the case was to go to the 
Secretary of the Treasury merely to "audit" the accounts, 
without regard to what was dispossession, what was ouster, what 
was " direct loss," &c. &c. Look at the character of these two 
chairmen — Mr. Hubbard in the Senate, Mr. Russell in the 
House — who for a year previous poured over these pages of 
testimony of the case — where will you find two persons more 
rigid in their investigation than these two gentlemen. Is this 
not proverbial ? 

This stern application of law, however, has been of signal 
benefit to the claimant. 

Congress was content, evidently so, that the testimony " care- 
fully " taken by the Secretary of the Treasury, was abundant; 
and now that these stern rules of law have called forth such 
evidence, as by the strictest judicial proceedings would be re- 
garded as proof of force, or violence, in causing the abandon- 
ment of the claimant's property ; it must go very far, to 
strengthen the Attorney-General in the execution of the duty 
confided to his special direction. Let us, nevertheless, look at 
the bill introduced in the Senate, and which passed unani- 
mously, in 184L 

26th Congress, 

2d Session. S. 265. [Pri. 

IN SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES. 

February 24, 1841. 
Mr. Hubbard, from the Committee of Claims, reported the fol- 
lowing bill, which was passed unanimously, and referred to* 
the House : 

A BILL 

FOR THE RELIEL OF CHARLES F. SIBBALD. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
the United States of Ameiica in Congress assembled, That the 
Secretary of the Treasury be, and he is hereby directed to 
audit and adjust the claims of Charles F. Sibbald against the 
United States, for losses sustained by him in his property, in 
consequence of being deprived, by the acts and authority of the 
agents of the Government of the United States, of the posses- 
sion and use of his lands and other property in East Florida, 



9 

from eighteen hundred and twenty-eight, to February seven, 
eig! teen hundred and thirty-six, at which time the title to said 
pr< perty was confirmed to the said Charles F. Sibbald, by the 
dec ision of the Supreme Court of the United States ; and the 
sa d Secretary of the Treasury, after he shall have audited and 
adjusted the said claims upon the principles of justice and 
equity, in case he shall find any sum due to the said Charles F. 
Sibbald, shall cause the amount thereof to be paid to him out of 
any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated. 

House of Representatives, ) 
February 25, 1841. \ 
Sir, — I have this moment received the copy of the bill intro- 
duced by you in the Senate for the relief of Charles F. Sibbald, 
and concur with you in the propriety of passing said bill into 
a law. 

I^am, with great respect, 

Your obedient servant, 

DAVID RUSSELL. 
Hon. Henry Hubbard, ) 
United States Senate. ) 

The words, " if any sum," have been construed as giving au- 
thority to investigate the merits of claim, but do not the bill 
and report of Congress of the facts of the case, as exhibited by 
them, both contradict such an assumption? In truth these 
words, it will be seen, were first introduced by Mr. Hubbard, 
in the original bill as it passed the Senate, merely sending the 
accounts to be audited only, and who, on making this provision, 
that any sum should be paid, did so evidently entertaining the 
opinion that so large an amount was due as to place these 
words, " if any sum," with a construction entirely at variance 
with the views that have been taken by the departments, and 
designing that any sum should be paid, however great it might 
be found, under the sanction and application of this law, which 
is now to be carried out, and under the direction of the Attorney- 
General of the United States. It can also be readily established 
beyond this, that the views of that chairman of the Committee 
of Claims were, as is the fact, " that the case involved a viola- 
tion of a treaty, and, as such, that the President of the U. States 
would deem it to be his duty, if called upon, to aid and recom- 
mend the passage of a bill for the relief of the claimant." 

Let us now pause to see what has been regarded heretofore 
as to the reports of the committees of Congress, in submitting a 
case to the departments for settlement. 

Mr. Butler, the Attorney-General of the United States, in an 

2 



10 

opinion, communicated to the Secretary of the Treasury, on the 
2od of November, 1837, page 1158 of the Opinions of the Attor- 
ney-Generals, says : — 

" In answer to the qiicstion proposed to me upon the memo- 
rial of Joseph Thomas tn tlie President, referred by your letter 
of the 23d instant, I have the honour to state, that the Reports 
of the committee of the Senate and House of Representatives, 
upon the bill for his relief, which subsequently passed into a 
law, should be taken as a guide in deciding any doubts which 
may arise in the construction of the law. 

" Reports may be well regarded as a key to the intentions of 
the legislature. These principles apply to the claim of intere&t, 
"which it appears the accounting officers do not think proper to 
allow, and I should be strongly inclined to think, in the words 
of the law itself, which requires the accounting officers to recog- 
nize judicial decisions, that the claimant was entitled to interest, 
and upon every acknowledged principle of justice ought to be 
carried out in the entire account." 

And Mr. Gilpin, Attorney-General, at page 1343, says: — 

" I have no doubt that the reports of the committees accom- 
panying a bill should be taken as a guide in deciding any ques- 
tion which may arise in the construction of the law." 

" Where the words of a statute are doubtful or uncertain," 
says Lord Chief Justice Willis, " it is proper to enquire what 
was the intention of the legislator." Willis' Reports, 397. 

If these views be correct, we presume, where a committee of 
Congress has used this following language, it will be deemed bind- 
ing on the Departments. 

"In this view of the case, the committee have found no difficul- 
ty in coming to the conclusion, that the damages which the pe- 
titioner actually sustained by reason of the interference of the 
government, by their agents, with the use, possession and en- 
joyment of his property in Florida, when ascertained upon 
principles of law and equity, according to a true construction of 
the testimony submitted, should be paid to him, and luith this view 
they report a bill." 

Let us next look at the bill which ultimately passed both 
branches of Congress, and became a law of the land, on the 23d 
of August, 1842. 

AN ACT 

FOR THE RELIEF OF ClIARLES F. SiBBALD. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and. House of Representatives of 
the United States of America in Congress assembled. That the 
third Auditor of the Treasury, under the direction of the Attar- 



11 

ny General, be, and he is hereby directed to ascertain the ac- 
tual damages which Charles F. Sibbald has sustained, and 
would be entitled to recover, upon the principles of law, as appli- 
cable to similar cases, by reason of the interference of any agent 
or agents of the United States, acting under their authority, 
with the use, possession, or enjoyment of his lands, timber, mills, 
or other property in East Florida, from eighteen hundred and 
twenty-eight, to February seventh, eighteen hundred and thirty- 
six, at which time the title of said property was confirmed to 
the said Charles F. Sibbald by the Supreme Court of the United 
States ; and that the Secretary of the Treasury, after the said 
damages shall have been ascertained in the manner aforesaid, in 
case any sum shall be found due to said Charles F. Sibbald, 
shall pay the same to him out of any money in the Treasury 
not otherwise appropriated. 

Upon the language of this act, which is so explicit as to re- 
quire but little remark, only one observation need be made. 

Now, in this bill the predominant word is " interference,^^ it 
says, by reason of the interference, not by reason of being dis- 
possessed, not by reason of being driven otf, or forced off, or 
ousted. The government of this great nation would not dis- 
grace itself, by forcing its citizens, at the points of bayonets 
of soldiers, to resist officers, acting under authority. Such an 
idea was never entertained in the legislature of a nation of free- 
men. No, they ordered no application of stern law, they expect- 
ed not that you should measure swords, or jeopardize "life or 
limb," but rather that you should respect and submit to the pub- 
lic authorities. Neither would a nation of freemen respect that 
individual, who should surrender his rights and authority over 
his own property, without proper resistance, and challenging the 
aggressor, who shall attempt to assail these rights. They will 
deem the acts of the claimants meritorious, when they shall 
see his deeds, in endeavouring to maintain his authority over 
his own property, and in endeavouring to save himself from 
shipwreck, ruin, and persecution, and even the government it- 
self, from a dreadful loss, by making repeated applications, and 
solicitations for their interposition, to come to his rescue. 

But this bill was intended to make reparation for an aggres- 
sion, however deep the wound, to heal it, if a pecuniary consid- 
eration could suffice, to compensate in cutting off the best days 
of years, of a short life, in making that life a life of toil, in mak- 
ing a free man a slave to creditors, made by the government, in 
taking his all from him, and leaving him shipwrecked for years, 
thrown on the world to meet the horrors of such a situation in 
every possible shape; can indemnity or reparation be made to 



12 

heal such wounds as these. A distinguished Senator from Penn- 
sylvania, said in the Senate, that " no money could ever com- 
pensate an injury like this," or words to that effect. 

Again, let us look at the word interference, what is the mean- 
ing of the word 1 Interference — intermeddling, clashing, inter- 
position. 

It is seen that the legislature has ordered reparation to be 
made for every consequence growing out of the interference of 
the government, with the property of the claimant in Florida, 
" with the use, possession, or enjoyment of his lands, " timber, 
mills, or other property," first forcing you to appeal to, and abide 
by the sternest rules of judicial proceedings, to try your own 
titles to your own lands, and throwing discredit on your titles 
for many years, that you can neither sell them, mortgage them, or 
use them in any possible way, declaring them on that trial to 
be " public lands," and giving donations of them 1 Is all this 
" an interference,^^ for which this claimant is entitled to indem- 
nity? 

Second. Is depriving you of the receipt, of sixteen thousand 
dollars, at the moment you need it, to carry on the mills you 
have erected, as driving Mr. Grice from his purpose of cutting 
the live oak, in November, 1829, which, in May, 1829, would 
have been received to carry on the mills completed on the 11th 
of June, 1829, " an interference?" 

Third. Is stopping the cutting of your pine mill logs, from 
that land on which you have built the largest mill in the world, 
dependent on your own timber, and entirely induced to build 
your mills, from having that timber, " an interference ?" 

Fourth. Is stopping your cutting your live oak, from your 
own lands, to build vessels after you have established a ship- 
yard, with a master builder on the spot from Philadelphia, and 
ship carpenters from New York and Philadelphia, on your pre- 
mises, a drafting shop, blacksmith shop, &c., prepared, " an in- 
terference?" 

Fifth. Is stopping you from cutting live oak, for your con- 
tracts, when bonds exist for k of ^300,000, " an interference?" 

Sixth. Is making public declaration, in the presence of your 
agents, captains, workmen of your own lands, being public prop- 
erty, producing dismay, confusion and consternation in driving 
your labourers from your forests, and threatening violence to them, 
to tye them up, and to imprison your agents, seizing your mill 
logs, and thus ruining your credit, " an interference ?" 

But what degree of force is necessary to sustain legal 
claims for injuries suffered in such a case as this. Let us look to 



13 

that author, to wliich we have been turned by an official opinion, 
given to the Secretary of the Treasury, in October, 1841, by the 
late Attorney General of the United States, H. S. Legare, Esq., 
on the subject of damages, in which he refers to that favorite 
author, Domat. 

Domatsays: "By force is meant all unlawful impressions, 
which move any one against his will, for fear of some great evil, 
to give a consent which he would not give if his liberty were 
free from such impression. — Uomat Book 1, p. 241. 

" The party who has made use of force, will be punished f )r it 
according to the quality of the fact, and be bound to make good 
all the loss and damages which he shall have occasioned. — Domat, 
p. 241, Book 1. 

" It is farther to be observed, on the same subject, of the eff'ct 
of force in covenants, that all manner of force, all violence, all 
threatenings, are unlawful ; and that the law condemns, not on- 
ly such as expose the life and. limbs to danger, or the body to any 
torments, but all sorts of bad treatjnent, and all forceable means, 
and in fine, it is to be remarked, that seeing all persons have not 
the same courage to resist violence, and threatenings, and that 
many are so weak that they cannot stand out against the least 
impression, we ought not to limit the laws against threatenings 
and violence, so far as to restrain only such acts as are capable 
to overcome persons of the greatest courage and intrepidity. 
But it is just, likewise, to protect the weakest and most fearful ; 
and it is chiefly on their account, that the laws punish all acts 
of violence and oppression. Thus, as the laws punish those, who 
by some deceit or surprize, take advantage of the simplicity of 
others, although the deceit does not amount to a direct forgery, 
or other excess, so likewise, with much greater reason do the 
laws chastise those, who by violent means, strike terror into the 
minds of weak persons, although the violence do not go so far 
as to put the life in danger." — Domat Book 1, p. 240. 

" The laws do not allow private persons to make use of any 
violence or force, whatsoever, not even to do themselves justice, 
and therefore, much less do they permit them to use violence or 
threats, to intimidate ; in order to extort a consent to an unjust 
pretention." — Domat, 241. 

In this case the law directs the payment of all damages that 
could be recovered, (between individuals,) upon the principles of 
law, applicable to similar cases, " by i-eason of the interference," 
with the use, possession, or enjoyment of the Z«7i(/s, timber, mills, 
or other property. Could any legislation be more clearly expres- 
sive of the intentions of the legislator ? 



14 

Let us now proceed to exhibit the facts of the case ; first, 
commencing by showing the land grant from Spain, the liberal 
policy of that nation ; secondly, the business established, induced 
by the grant; thirdly, that the claimant then had the free use 
and enjoyment of his property, cut his timber, built his mills, 
and embarked in these undertakings, relying on the continued 
use and enjoyment of that property, as when he commenced this 
business ; fourth, that he enjoyed a credit based on the owner- 
ship of his property ; fifth, the interference, and the laws under 
which it originated ; sixth, the instructions from the govern- 
ment ; seventh, the acts of the officers ; eight, the destruction 
and final abandonment of the claimants property, and the cor- 
respondence with the Departments at Washington, on the sub- 
ject of these aggressions. 

First. Believing it may be important to exhibit fully, every 
matter connected with this claim, so that it shall be understood 
by the people of the United States, as well as the Attorney Gen- 
eral, we will commence by showing it from the date of the 
grant, and residence of the claimant in Florida, under the gov- 
ernment of Spain, to the abandonment of the property under the 
compulsion of the government of the U. States. 

The peculiar position of Florida, on our southern border, for 
several years previous to the cession, and while it was a colony 
of Spain, with a fine harbour, which sometimes was filled with 
hundreds of ships, with the flags of almost every nation, and 
while we were engaged in a war with England, and previously 
during our non-intercourse and embargo, together with the wars 
in Europe, forced thither, an immense commerce: our cotton and 
other produce thus found its way to Europe, and elsewhere ; 
our imports, to a large extent, came through that channel, and 
previous to this, the war in Europe, cutting off" England from 
supplying herself with the timber required for her "thousand 
ships of war," whilst that from her own possessions in America, 
would have been liable to capture — forced that government to 
resort to the forests of that, then province of Spain, for the tim- 
ber required for her immense Navy, especially the superior pine 
of that territory. These accumulated commercial advantages, 
carried to Florida, a few of our own citizens, the claimant was 
one of these, who had then, at an early age, removed from 
Philadelphia, and was for several years participating in an ex- 
tensive commercial business at that period at Fernandina, Ame- 
lia Island. This business being ended with the peace in Eu- 
rope, and also, between England and the United States, the 
claimant naturally, and immediately turned his attention to oth- 
<er pursuits. 



15 

Spain, impoverished by her revolution at home, and in South 
America, could illy spare any of her declining revenue to sup- 
port her distant colonies. Thus, in 1814, a Royal Order was 
transmitted from Madrid to the Governor of East Florida, to 
use every means in his power to assist the Royal Treasury, 
and to encourage by all means the trade in boards and plank, 
on which an export duty was derived. (See compilation of 
Joseph M. White, Esq., page 239.) How was the trade in 
boards and plank to be encouraged in a country where there 
were no saw-mills 1 It was in compliance with this order from 
the King of Spain, that Governor Coppinger made the grant for 
16,000 acres of land to the claimant. 

ROYAL ORDER from the King of Spain to the Governor 
of Florida, under which lands were granted, on condition of 
erecting saw-mills in that Territory. See Compilation of Land 
Laws, made by Joseph M. White, Esq., page 237, published by 
order of Congress. 

Letter from the Captain General (of the Island of Cuba) to 
the Governor of East Florida, communicating the Royal Order 
for the encouragement of the trade in plank, boards, &c. 

No. 1. 

Havana, March 4th, 1815. 
Under date of the 31st July last, his Excellency, the Minister 
of the Treasury, says as follows : — 

" I have communicated to the King your Excellency's letter 
of the 17th of November, 1812, No. 8, on having urged the 
Governor of East Florida and commandant of West, to procure 
means of assistance for the Royal Treasury, promoting for this 
purpose the trade in naval stores, masts, staves, boards and 
plank, and in consequence His Majesty approves of said mea- 
sures, it being his royal will that your excellency will use every 
means for the encouragement of this branch of trade, to the 
benefit of industry and commerce of that country, which, by 
Royal Order I communicate to your excellency for your infor- 
mation, and that it may be complied with — which I transmit ta 
your excellency for the execution of it on your part. 

God preserve your excellency many years. 

APODACA. 
To His Excellency the Governor of East Florida. 



16 ' 

No. 2. 

Original certified Copy by Aguilar of Memorial for Grant. 

MEMORIAL. 

Senor Governor, — Don Charles F. Sibbald, resident and mer- 
chant of Fernandina, with due respect to your excellency, says, 
that being desirous of investing his funds in the construction of 
machinery to saw timber, and finding a suitable situation upon 
the creek called Six Mile Creek, alias Little Trout Creek, on 
the north side of the river St. Johns, and that of Nassau, the 
creek of which empty their waters into the said St. Johns 
River, and as by the construction of such a work there will 
result important advantages to the commerce of this province, 
besides remunerate the interested for his means and labour, he 
supplicates your excellency's superior permission for the pur- 
pose, with corresponding warrant for the survey of the grant 
of lands embraced in a line of two and a half miles to each wind, 
making a square of five miles, or its equivalent, in the event that 
this situation will not permit the same form, which land will 
ensure the continual supply of timber. It is a favour which he 
hopes to merit from the goodness of your excellency. Fernan- 
dina, 16th of July, 1816. 

Signed, CHARLES F. SIBBALD. 

Grant to Sibbald of 16,000 acres. 

DECREE. 

St. Augustine, 2d August, 1816. 
" The same is granted to the petitioner, without prejudice to 
the right of another, on the express condition that until the 
establishment of a mill, the grant of land, which will be two 
and a half miles to each wind, shall be of no efl^ect, (in order 
that he may use the timber with absolute prohibition to all other 
persons from making use of the same,) in conceit that his grant 
is never to be taken in any other view than that of protection 
to the settling inhabitants, and to stimulate them to industry. 
Knowing the advantages that will result to the province by its 
settlement, and consequently to the interest of the King, as a 
security to the interested, let there be issued to him, by the 
Secretary, the corresponding certificate in the usual form. 

Signed, COPPINGER." 

Don Tomas de Aguilar, Sub-lieutenant of Infantry, Secretary 
by His Majesty of this government, of the city and province of 
St. Augustine, of Florida. 



17 

I certify that the preceding copy is faithfully taken from the 
original, which exists in the Secretary's Office under my charge 
— and in compliance with what is ordered, I give the present in 
St. Augustine, of Florida, the 3d of August, 1816. 

Signed, TOM AS DE AGUILAR. 

Copy of a letter from General Joseph M. Hernandez to 
Charles F. Sibbald, then residing at Fernandina, Amelia Island, 
East Florida : — • 

St. Augustine, April 20th, 1816. 
Charles F. SibbaM, Esq. 

My Dear Sir, — I am sorry to say that at the time of 
procuring a favourable decree to your mill grant, it was disco- 
vered that the spot asked for is granted to Mr. Huertas, of this 
place. I have, however, obtained a decree, saying, that that 
land being occupied, -the same quantity loill be granted else- 
where, so that it now rests with you to look out for another 
place; after the establishment is made the land become yours. 
Your obedient servant, 
Signed, JOSEPH M. HERNANDEZ. 

Note. — Finding that notwithstanding other grants had been 
made at the place asked for (as a location for my mill) as is 
mentioned in the preceding letter, that I could get a part of the 
land granted to me at that place, I sent in a second Memorial, 
as the first had had the decree placed in it which General Her- 
nandez states, and which caused me to make the provision in 
that Memorial, that I could have the deficiency desired by me 
located anywhere, according with the decree of Governor Cop- 
pinger, placed in my first Memorial. 

The lands under this grant, conformably with its provisions, 
were divided in three surveys. 

10,000 acres on the River St. Johns, about 16 square miles ; 
growth, yellow pine, live oak, cypress, &c. 

4,000 near New Smyrna, about 6 square miles ; growth, live 
oak, red cedar, orange, &c. 

2,00d in Alachua, about 3 square miles ; growth, live oak, 
hickory, white oak, &c., all fit for the cultivation of sugar, cot- 
ton, corn, &c. Surveyed by the Spanish Surveyor-General, 
and plots thereof handed to the claimant. 

This is the land that the District-Attorney of Florida de- 
clared, in February, 1829, was the public property of the 
United States, and this is the land confirmed to the claimant, 10 
Peters, 213, and in 12 Peters, 479. The Supreme Court says : — 
" The strongest case in favour of a grantee is the case of Sib- 



18 

bald." And again, page 480 :— " Sibbald, in good faith, and in 
a reasonable time after the decree in his favour, began to build 
his mil! — expended five thousand dollars towards it — had his 
horses and negroes stolen, while the mill was building— his dam 
carried away by a freshet, in the absence of the mill-wright, 
who was in pursuit of the stolen property. Rebuilt his mill in 
1827, which was destroyed by fire the same year; and the year 
after built another mill, of seventy horse power, which could 
sav^' twenty thousand superficial feet of lumber a day." See U. 
States vs. Kingsley, 12 Pet. 486. 

The first mill built was a water mill, the second a steam mill, 
which, when destroyed, was insured. The third mill worked 
eio-ht gangs of saws ; and a fourth steam mill was constructing, 
and nearly finished, when the claimant was forced to abandon 
his lands and property, from the illegal interference of the 
government of the United States. 

Secondly. It is thus seen that the claimant had been in the 
peaceable possession and enjoyment of the property for many 
years, both under the government of Spain as well as that of 
the United States ; had built mills, again and again — cut his 
timber — and was in the free use and enjoyment of the property, . 
until he was disturbed, as we shall hereafter exhibit. 

The liberality of the Spanish government in granting the 
public domain, throughout her dominions everywhere, is a well 
known matter of history. 

Whether for factories, for mills, for pasturage, or for agricul- 
tural purposes, it was given commensurate with the means and 
power of the applicant to bring it into usefulness. 

Not only was the public domain thus granted in Florida, but 
the inhabitants were permitted to cut timber, of any descrip- 
tion, on any extent of land they pleased to ask, which the fol- 
lowing extract will exemplify. 

The following extract of a communication from the Governor 
of East Florida to the Marquis of Sumeruelos, the Captain Gen- 
eral of the Island of Cuba, dated at St. Augustine, June 19, 
1811, (taken from a compilation of J. M. While, Esq., p. 236,) 
shows that the Spanish government gave permission to the in- 
habitants to cut timber of any description on the public lands, 
to any extent, without limit, without price, without a grant, — 
which timber was disposed of as their own individual property, 
as is adverted to in my letters, pages 12 and 16. The Governor 
says in his letter: — 

" The greater part of the commerce of this province at the 
present, is carried on in British vessels, coming to the port of 
Fernandina, Amelia Island, for the purpose of taking timber and 



19 

carrying it to England, — paying the slight duty of 7§ percent., 
levied upon a moderate valuation. This timber is fe.led by the 
inhabitants wherever they please, loithout restriction." 

Yet the United States drove this claimant off of his own pro- 
perty in 1830, which they had solemnly guaranteed to respect, 
and declared his lands public land, and kept him out of posses- 
sion, forcing him to the most iniquituous trial of his titles, and 
keeping his case from being tried for several years. 

The treaty ceding Florida to the United States was ratified 
on the 22d of July, 1821, and in 1823 the claimant returned to 
his native city of Philadelphia. There, with this property, and 
some other smaller grants from Spain, he established himself in 
mercantile pursuits, and in 1826 formed a most extensive plan 
of business, which he carried into execution, to be conducted 
from his domicil in Philadelphia. While he had the free use 
and enjoyment of his property, until the month of November, 
1828, his ability, based upon its value, and the general confi- 
dence in his undertaking, and that property, to furnish means, 
on selling it, or cutting his timber, his credit was unlimited. 
But as a " natural consequence," immediately flowing from the 
" wrong " the interference of the government, in cutting off his 
property from him, also cut off his credit, which is a damage 
more important than would have been applying the fire-brand 
to his mills, for with the command of his property and credit, he 
could easily have repaired that loss — without his property he 
was powerless. 

The Supreme Court of the United States, in 6 Peters, pages 
691 to 670, has defined the rights of ownership of the claimants 
of lands held under grants from Spain in Florida, and that by 
the 8th article of the treaty there was a " present" confirmation 
of this grant simultaneously with the ratification of that treaty. 
This is a highly important point of consideration, as it estab- 
lishes by this unquestionable authority, that in this case there 
has been a clear violation of the treaty existing with Spain, and 
thus it would have been the duty of the President of the United 
States to see the claimants righted under that provision of the 
Constitution where he is directed to see that the laws are faith- 
fully executed. Would this provision then not operate, and 
have dispensed with the necessity of proving " force," or " vio- 
lence," or " ousters," or " danger of life or limb," etc. 

The claimant established in Philadelphia, very soon saw how 
he could make his Floridean possessions immensely productive. 
He had a beautiful situation about 15 miles from the sea, at the 
junction of two rivers, on his ten thousand acre tract. His 
land contained live oak, yellow pine, red cedar, cypress, and 



20 

other valuable wood. His residence in a large city gave the 
best opportunity to make contracts for his lumber of every kind. 

He erected the most extensive saw mills in the world to saw 
up his own pine. 

He made contracts with the government and individuals to 
sell his live oak for the Navy and merchant service — also, pine 
ranging timber, girders, beams, &c. 

He established a ship yard under a master builder from 
Philadelj)hia, and had ship carpenters on the spot from New 
York and Philadelphia to build vessels, with frames of his live 
oak. He bought the right of Woodsmith's planing machines, so 
that the engines that sawed the timber should at the same time 
plane it, as it came from the saws. He established a store, and 
was vending every description of merchandise, and buying 
cotton and other produce. He had a vessel under the Spanish 
liag, which, under a special provision of the Florida treaty, 
could come to Florida for 12 years as an American, while they 
could carry flour to Havanna at $2 50 per barrel less than an 
American registered vessel ; and some articles of dry goods at 
30 per cent less than under the American flag. 

Several vessels were purchased to carry on his business. 
His plans were generally approved, and his credits commen- 
surate with his undertakings and the ownership of this property. 
(See evidence of Wm. L. Haskins, Charles Snowden and John 
F. Ohl.) 

Thirdly. We will now place ourselves in the year 1827, 
when no interference had been made, and evincing what use 
this claimant was then making of his property. The following 
will exhibit that he was then a merchant, in the enjoyment of 
property and credit. We will presently show him selling his 
lands, making contracts for his live oak timber, building the 
most extensive mills in the world to saw his pine, and rapidly 
to convert it also into active capital. Building vessels to make 
sure sale of his pine and live oak timber, and with a mercantile 
business in Philadelphia and Florida, based on the use and con- 
trol of his own property, and without which it never would have 
been undertaken or contemplated. 

We will show that every particle of ownership and use of 
that very property as effectually cut off from the owner as if he 
owned not one part of it ; and will respectfully ask any one to 
exhibit any use whatever that the claimant had of his property 
from the commencement of the interruption to the day of the 
decree of the Supreme Court confirming the grant to the entire 
16,000, with every privilege given by the government of Spain. 

The claimant will, before proceeding further, recapitulate as 



21 

to the mills erected by him to the present day upon his Floridian 
possessions. 

1819, a water saw mill, capacity 1 gang, 1 single saw, 13 saws. 

1827, a steam saw mill, " 1 " 2 " 14 " 

1829, a steam saw mill, " 8 " 48 " 

1829, a steam saw mill, " 2 " 1 " 25 " 

1839, a steam saw mill, " 1 " 40 " 



Total capacity single saws, 140 

Also, 2 planing machines, 1 large circular saw and a grist mill. 
The mills which the claimant was forced to abandon in 1830, 
were completely destroyed, by delapidation and decay, and with 
every building prostrated. The mills recently erected by the 
claimant, were put up, depending on the prompt settlement of 
the claim now awaiting the indemnity or reparation from the 
government to enable him to operate them. 

DOCUMENT (A) S. G.) 

This agreement made and concluded this 12th day of October, 
A. D. 1827, between Samuel Grice and Charles F. Sibbald, 
both of the City of Philadelphia, and State of Pennsylvania, 
witnesseth. 

That whereas the Spanish Government did, in the year A. D. 
1816, concede unto Charles F. Sibbald, a grant of land in East 
Florida, now the Territory of Florida, containing four thousand 
acres, which is surveyed in what is known there as TurnbuU's 
Swamp, — %vhich said four thousand acres is said to be covered 
with live oak timber ; and whereas the said Samuel Grice now 
has a certain contract with the government of United States 
for a set of live oak fiames ; to wit, one for a seventy-four gun 
ship — one for a forty-four gun ship — and one for a twenty gun 
ship — making three entire frames of live oak, and in quantity 
about seventy thousand cubical feet ; and said S. Grice being 
desirous to avail himself of said timber to execute said contract; 
now, it is this day agreed between the said parties, that the said 
Charles F. Sibbald doth sell and dispose of to the said Samuel 
Grice, so much of the live oak on three thousand acres of the 
above premises, (one thousand acres being already disposed of) 
as shall be necessary or required to complete the three entire 
frames of ships above mentioned, at (16 cts.) say sixteen cents 
per cubical foot for mould timber — and the said Charles F. Sib- 
bald, further grants the privilege of cutting roads, building 
houses, and entering into the said premises in any manner that 



may be requisite for the fulfilment and execution of this agree- 
ment, and further agrees to hold harmless the said Samuel Grice, 
from any difficiiUy that may arise from any conflicting claim to 
the said land ; and the said Samuel Grice hereby agrees to cut, 
or cause to be cut, any live oak which can be used in the said 
three frames, and to pay for the same, at the price before men- 
tioned, on the delivery of each cargo at its port of destination. 

It is further understood, that Charles F. Sibbald shall have 
the benefit of all improvements made on the said premises, such 
as houses, stores, &c. there erected, and which shall become his 
property, provided the cutting of the said timber shall occupy at 
least the ensuing season. 

For the true performance of this agreement the parties do 
bind themselves, each in the penal sum of one thousand dollars. 
In witness whereof, the parties have hereunto interchangeably 
set their hands and seal, the day and year first above written. 

SAMUEL GRICE, [seal.] 

CHARLES F. SIBBALD, [seal.] 

Witness present — 

John Gibson, ) 

Cornelius Tiers, ) 

The brother of Mr. Grice, proceeded with the Spanish Sur- 
veyor, to survey the land, and from information received from 
him of the great quantity of live oak on the land, Mr. S. Grice, 
extended this contract to 100,000 cubic feet. 

Whereas the undersigned, Charles F. Sibbald and Samuel 
Grice, did, on the 12th October, 1837, enter into an agreement, 
whereby the said Sibbald, for the consideration mentioned there- 
in, did sell to said Grice the live oak on his land in Florida; 
and whereas it was found impracticable to obtain the said tim- 
ber the past season, in consequence of difficulties not anticipated 
by either party, thus subjecting the said Grice to serious incon- 
veniences and loss, and the said Sibbald to inconvenience in not 
receiving funds for the timber as anticipated by the contracts ; 
and whereas the said Sibbald is desirous of raising funds on the 
timber as above mentioned, which the said Grice is willing to 
assist in, on terms of mutual reciprocity, Therefore this agree 
ment witnesseth, that the said Grice agrees to advance his notes 
to the said Sibbald, to amount of dollars, 

to be renewed by him until Grice shall be in receipt of timber 
to amount thereof, in consideration of which, Sibbald agrees that 
in addition to the timber sold Grice, as per original contract, he 
is to be at liberty to take any additional timber he may want 



23 

for mould timber, at the specified price of sixteen cents per cu- 
bic foot, and promiscuous timber at ten cents, and the smaller 
timber, less than tliat required for the Navy, at eight cents per 
cubic foot; the whole amount not to exceed one hundred thou- 
sand cubic feet. 

SAMUEL GRICE, [seal.] 

CHARLES F. SIBBALD, [seal.] 

Philadelphia, April 3d, 1828. 

Whereas, a certain agreement for the sale of live oak timber 
situated in Turnbull's Swamp, East Florida, was made and en- 
tered into on the 12th day of October, A. D. 1827, between 
Samuel Grice and Charles F. Sibbald, of Philadelphia, and 
whereas, the said agreement was extended on the 3rd day of 
April last, now it is further understood and agreed to between 
the said parties, that three years shall be the time limited to cut 
the live oak embraced in said agreement ; that during the ensu- 
ing fall and winter, the greater part of the hands now contem- 
plated to be sent out by the said Grice, shall be located to cut 
on said tract ; and it is further understood and agreed by the 
parties to said agreement, that they bind themselves each to the 
other, their heirs, executors, administrators and assigns, for the 
true and faithful performance thereof, in the penal sum of three 
thousand dollars. Witness our hands and seals at Philadelphia, 
this thirteenth day of May, A. D. 1828. 

SAMUEL GRICE, [seal.] 

CHARLES F. SIBBALD. [seal.] 

Witness present — 
George Beriman, 
John Evil. 

Mr.Grice sent, in conformity to this agreement, to cut the tim- 
ber, and in November, 1828, they were forced, as will be shown, 
to abandon the undertaking by Mr. Acken, the agent of the 
United States. 

L. B. A.— folio 351. 
Charles F. Sibbald to Samuel Grice, Esq. 

Philadelphia, October 22d, 1827. 
Dear Sir, — Hereunto annexed you have a copy of the origi- 
nal plan of four thousand acres, surveyed for me in Turnbull's 
Swamp, Mosquito. I have addressed Mr. Clarke, the former 
Surveyor General of East Florida, to send his brother (his for- 



24> 

mer deputy, by whom the survey was made) down to Mosquito, 
to point out my lines. 

You will perceive the one thousand acres I have disposed of, 
is marked oti' in the plan — your hands can cut any where else 
on the survey. Yours very respectfully, 

CHARLES F. tSIBBALD. 

Letter Book A, page 348. 

Extract of a letter from Charles F. Sibbald to George J. F. 
Clarke, Esq., (late) Spanish Surveyor General of East Flori- 
da, at St. Augustine, dated 

Philadelphia, October 22d, 1827. 
Dear Sir, — I had this pleasure by mail this day, which hope 
you will have received ere tliis reaches you — the present will be 
handed you by Mr. Grice, the brother of Mr. Samuel Grice of 
this city, to whom I have sold a quantity of live oak contained 
on my four thousand acre survey made by your brother for me, 
in Turnbull's Back Swamp. In my letter by mail this day, I 
requested you would have the goodness to engage your brother 
to hold himself in readiness to proceed with Mr. Grice to Mos- 
quito, to point out my lines, if not already engaged. You will 
please immediately, should he be absent from St. Augustine, to 
send an express for him, and by all means to engage him forme, 
that no disappointment shall occur. 

Mr. Grice is now preparing a vessel to proceed direct to Mos- 
quito, with men, provisions, and the necessary arrangements to 
commence cutting the live oak, and must beg that you will have 
the goodness to make such an arrangement with your brother 
that he will not be delayed in his operations. I send you a 
copy of my plot, although you have the original, as it may not 
be at hand. 



The following is the first information received by the claim- 
ant of interruption in his business in Florida by the government 
of the United States. 

Extract of a letter from William L. Haskins, Esq., agent of 
Charles F. Sibbald, at Panama Steam Saw Mills, East Flo- 
rida, June 11th. 1828. 

In consequence of the arrival of a special agent from govern- 
ment, to prevent t/ie cutting of timber on public lands, ive are in 
sad trouble here. He has seized 8000 feet of live oak, (mould- 
ed,) cargoes on ship board, cut upon a tract of land confirmed by 
the Board of Land Commissioners. For this reason, 1 am pre- 



25 

vented from taking the balance of the timber from Black Creek. 
I am fearful that he will interfere with timber cut from Mill 
Grants. 

Immediately on the receipt of this letter, the claimant ad- 
dressed the following to the Hon. Joseph M. White, then at 
New York. 

Extract of a letter from Charles F. Sibbald to Jos. M. White,* 
Esq., Delegate from Florida, dated 

Philadelphia, June 27th, 1828. 
Dear Sir, — I have a letter this morning from my agent in 
Florida, stating that a special agent has arrived from Washington 
on the river St. Johns, where he is seizing vessels laying there 
loaded with live oak timber, or their cargoes, and says, from the 
report of the Land Commissioners' Receiver and Register there, 
that the timber cut on Mill Grants also is subject to seizure. 
Was there ever any thing so iniquitous, — to detain vessels and 
seize property before the right of the property is decided ? The 
government of Spain, actuated by liberal views in these res- 
pects, gave you leave to cut any quantity, and on any extent 
of land you pleased, without making the expenditure of thou- 
sands of dollars, as I have invested on my property, and which 
have only now been informed that there was a question of my 
right to. I have now four vessels, either in the river St. Johns, 
or will shortly arrive there; two out of the four vessels now 
gone, have cost nine thousand dollars. The measures pursuing 
there by the government will prove of serious consequences to 
me ; these vessels are liable at this season of the year to be 
seriously injured by the worms, and seizing live oak timber, 
even if he does not directly interfere with me, by seizing what I 
have bought fram others, and detaining my vessels, it will be 
tantamount. I must beg, therefore, that you will, on receipt of 
this, have the goodness to inform me, whether, as the represen- 
tative of the people of Florida, you will write to the Secretary 
of the Treasury, or to whose office it may belong, and protest 
against such an unjust measure, which, if you deem it of conse- 
quence to remove the erroneous impression made of Mill 
Grants, I will send a certified copy and translation of mine to the 
Secretary of the Treasury. I consider that my grants stand on 
such strong grounds, that they cannot deprive me of an acre in 
justice, to trace them from the beginning, — of the ultimate re- 
sult, I do not feel apprehensive. I think you will have no diffi- 
culty whatever in establishing my title on the strong grounds 

4 



26 

which it is held. Please let me hear from you as soon as con- 
venient. I am, dear Sir, 

Most respectfully yours, 

CHARLES F. SIBBALD. 
Hon. Jos. M. White. 

The following communication was transmitted immediately 
to the claimant, and forwarded by him to the Secretary of the 
"'I'reasury. 

Copy of Remonstrance from the Honourable Joseph M. White, 

Delegate from Florida, made at the request of Charles F. 

Sibbald, dated 

New York, June 30th, 1828. 

Sir, — I am informed that an agent has been sent to Florida to 
have all vessels arrested which may be laden with live oak. So 
far as the timber may be taken from the public lands, and par- 
ticularly within the districts set apart by the President's pro- 
clamation under the law, it may be proper ; but I apprehend 
that the government never have, and never can arrest any one, 
or any vessel for the timber cut from lands covered by a Spa- 
nish grant. If an unfavourable report was ever made by a local 
Board not authorized by law to pronounce a final judgment, 
the United States must provide for the decision before they can 
seize upon or consider it public property. Such has been the 
practice of the government, and a contrary rule would embar- 
rass all the trade of the country, and subject the government to 
damages for every illegal seizure^ I am, &c., 

JOSEPH M. WHITE. 

To the Hon. Richard Rush. Secretary of the Treasury, Wash- 
ington. 

Up to this time, which will exhibit a period of twelve years 
from the dale of the grant from Spain, made in August, 1816, 
the claimant had had the free use and enjoyment of his proper- 
ty under both the Spanish and American governments. He 
was the lawful owner of the property — he had disbursed im- 
mense sums of money upon it, and by this disbursement, as it 
were, bought it from Spain. There was a condition in the 
grant, and it was complied with. He had built his mills, cut 
and sawed his own timber, sold his lands, and used his property 
at his free will and pleasure, and had exercised every right of 
ownership upon it, from the year 1816. To this period, there 
had no fears operated upon his mind, to check his will, or con- 
trol it — no duresse, no terror to operate upon him — nothing to 
place before him, that his honour could be sullied or tajrnished 



27 

by using his own property, or selling it, or obtaining either mo- 
ney or credit upon it, as he pleased. 

At this period, he had obviously embarked in an immense un- 
dertaking, and had no alternative but to go on, or to sink. As 
yet, the government had not directly interfered upon his pre- 
mises ; his property, up to this period, was considered of great 
value, and his credit, as a merchant, very fair. 

Fourthly. Mr. Haskins, the first agent of the mills, says, in 
his deposition, (see printed book,) " Very soon after deponent 
left Panama, in 1828, and returned to New York, the said mill 
was destroyed by fire ; that said Sibbald proceeded to rebuild 
said mill on the same site as formerly, but on a scale more en- 
larged and costly ; that up to the time of deponent's leaving 
Panama, and for a length of time afterwards, probably until the 
completion of the second mill, said Sibbald enjoyed a liigh de- 
gree of mercantile credit, based upon business character and 
talent, distinguished for indomitable energy and perseverence, 
and upon the reported value of his mill grants in Florida ; that 
deponent, while at Panama, was requested by merchants of 
New York, having negotiations either pending or in prospect 
with said Sibbald, to obtain and forward the opinions of the 
most competent judges as to the actual value of said grant ; that 
in pursuance of such request, deponent asked and obtained the 
opinions of various persons, and among others, that of George I. 
F. Clark, since deceased, then residing at St. Augustine, for- 
merly Surveyor-General of the territory of Florida, than whom, 
as deponent believes, no person possessed a more accurate and 
thorough knowledge than said Clark of that section of Florida, 
within which said grants are located, as well as of the particu- 
lar location, boundaries, derivation, and foundation of title of 
said grants, together with the extent, description, and value of 
the timber contained thereon, nor was any person deemed, by 
deponent, to be better qualified than said Clark to judge of the 
value of said grants." 

[The claimant has a copy of the letter, and will presently 
give an extract of it.] 

" That deponent cannot remember the details of the opinion 
then expressed by said Clark, or by other persons, having no 
copies of the answers communicating said opinions to the cor- 
respondents of deponent in New York, but remembers the im- 
port of said opinions and the general impressions they concurred 
m fixing upon his memory, to wit — the great intrinsic value of 
said grants, and especially a part, from the actual value of the 
lands, — for the heavy growth of live oak, yellow pine, and other 
timber, with which said grants of land were thickly covered y 



28 

tliat said opinions, so as aforesaid obtained and communicated 
to the correspondents of deponent, were entirely accordant and 
coincident with the personal observation of deponent, and that 
such was deponent's great confidence in the abundance and ex- 
cellence of the timber upon said grants of land, together with 
the facility of obtaining and shipping the same therefrom, that 
deponent, about the year 1828, applied for a government con- 
tract, and otfcred to furnish live oak frames complete for 74's, 
frigates, and sloops of war for the United States navy." 

" Mr. Sibbald had extensive credit with several houses in 
New York." (See evidence of Charles Snowden, page 18.) 

" I did know several commercial houses in Boston, New 
York, and Philadelphia, with whom Mr. Sibbald enjoyed ex- 
tensive credits." (See evidence Wm. J. Mills, page 146.) 

" The lands were valued at SlO per acre, independent of the 
live oak upon them." (See George Colt, page 117.) 

It will be recollected that the mill grant is 16,000 acres, or 
25 square miles of land, covered with " live oak, yellow pine, 
red cedar," and other valuable wood, and that this grant was 
divided in three surveys of 10,000. 4,000, and 2,000 acres. 

That these live oak lands are what the Surveyor-General, 
George F. Clarke, Esq., in a letter (to Mr. William L. Haskins, 
in answer to an application made at the instance of Messrs. 
Edward W. Dunham & Co., New York,) dated September 7th, 
1828, said, " These lands are not inferior in point of soil, and 
certainly superior in climate and situation, to the sugar lands 
of Louisiana, that are selling at from fifty to one hundred dol- 
lars the acre." These are the lands on which the claimant's 
dependence was based for large resources in this undertaking, 
from the value of the live oak timber upon them — and their 
value for cultivation after it was cut ; and these were first 
assailed. That in consequence thereof, he could not and did 
not dispose of, or sell them, or an acre of them, after th9 inte- 
ference of the government. 

We will now show the first interference of Mr. Acken, the 
agent of the United States, which caused the first letter to Jos. 
M. White, Esq., Delegate of Florida, and his remonstrance to 
the Secretary of the Treasury, already shown. At this period, 
the agent had only interfered indirectly with the claimant, by 
seizing his timber upon an unconfirmed Spanish grant at 
Black Creek, as Mr. Haskins' following letter will show, which 
alludes to his letter announcing the arrival of a special messen- 
ger of the government, on the 11th June, 1828. 



29 

" That deponent was not definitely informed at the time of 
writing the foregoing, (see his letter, 11th June, 1828,) what 
were the intentions of said agent in regard to mill grants ; that 
said Acken did actually seize various parcels of live oak timber 
indifferent parts of the country, at the time referred to, to wit, 
in the month of June, 1828, and especially some timber which 
deponent was receiving on Black Creek, on account of said Sib- 
bald and others concerned in the mill and store enter prize at 
Panama, in consequence whereof, every day apprehending the 
further seizure of the moulded frame and other live oak timber, 
then lying at Panama, and designed for building vessels, depo- 
nent shipped of said frames, constructed by direction of said 
Pearson, together with a quantity of promiscuous live oak and 
other timber, pine ranging timber and beams, to New York, 
thereby causing great loss to the concern, as considerable por- 
tions of iron and copper, and other materials for completing the 
frames already in progress, had been provided and shipped out 
to Panama, from Philadelphia and New York, and such iron 
and copper, and other materials, had to be re-shipped and sold, 
without appropriating them to the purpose for which they were 
designed." 

This act of the United States' agent, thus far broke up the 
ship building, as Mr. Pearson, the master builder, soon after 
returned to Philadelphia, and also the ship carpenters sent out 
from New York and Philadelphia, never to return. 

Mr. Haskins continues, " that a branch of business intended 
to be conducted in connection with the mills and store, and 
which was carried on to some extent, until interrupted by the 
introduction of a government agent as to the cutting of timber, 
was that of ship building, a branch which deponent believes 
could have been carried on to a greater extent than it was car- 
ried on to a profit. That in order to conduct this branch to the 
best advantage, said Sibbald, as deponent knows, had taken 
much pains, and incuri'ed great expense, to provide efiicient and 
valuable mechanics, workmen, and other persons to conduct and 
superintend the same, that to this end, he, said Sibbald had 
secured the services of Mr. Samuel S. Pearson, a shipwright of 
Philadelphia of high standing there in his own profession, and 
carrying on a large business of his own, to reside at Panama, as 
superintendent of the mills, and chief director of the building of 
vessels, giving him a small ratio of profit out of the store busi- 
ness, as at no meagre compensation could said Pearson be in- 
duced to forego the profits of his own business at home. That 
to the same end, the loft of the mill building being about one 
hundred feet in length by about forty wide, as neaj? as deponent 



/ 



30 

can remember, was at considerable expense, furnished for the 
purposes of a draughting loft, and (many) workmen and me- 
chanics well instructed and skilled in the art of ship building 
were procured at Philadelphia and New York, and sent out at 
great expense, and employed in framing vessels under the direc- 
tion of said Pearson, out of the live oak and other timber cut on 
the mill grant of said Sibbald, and other contiguous lands." 

" That said Pearson has expressed to deponent, his, said Pear- 
son's, entire confidence in being able to carry on the business of 
ship building at and in conjunction with said mill to great ad- 
vantage, from the abundance, excellence, cheapness and conti- 
guity of timber, coupled with the facility of obtaining the 
necessary and best description of plank for planking and for 
decks, from the mill designed to saw lengths of fifty feet, 
together with the best beam timber in full view in all directions, 
to be had for the cutting. That it was the deliberate opinion of 
said Pearson, as expressed to deponent, that with twelve hands 
he could build a vessel of 150 tons every three months. That 
said Pearson actually constructed one entire frame of a brig, of 
the burthen, as near as can be recollected, of 150 to 200 tons, 
which was intended to be set up and completed there, but which, 
as deponent believes, was prevented by the interdiction of the 
agents of the United States." (See also evidence of Wm. J. 
Mills, Charles Snowden, John J. Birley and Thomas T. 
Vaughan, ship builders of Philadelphia.) 

Sixth. We will now show the appointment of a special agent 
of the United States, to go to Florida, to protect the timber of 
that country — his commission, and the instructions issued to 
him ; also to the collector of customs, and District Attorney, by 
the Treasury Department, the Navy Department, and General 
Land Office — thus exhibiting their authority clearly, in the mat- 
ter, and that the departments at Washington were acting under 
the legislation of Congress at that period, however illegal, how- 
ever unconstitutional, however unjust and oppressive it was, as 
the Supreme Court of the United States has exhibited it to be, 
in their action upon the Florida treaty ; for they have confirm- 
ed these Spanish grants under their full definition and construc- 
tion of the treaty with Spain. (See 6 Peters, Arredondo vs. 
the States.) 

Navy Department, April 10th, 1828. 

Sir, — By information received at this Department from 

sources entitled to credit, it is apprehended that depredations to 

a considerable extent have been committed on timber, especially 

the live oak growing on lands belonging to the United States, 

\ 



31 

and particularly at or near a branch of the river St. Johns, 
called the Ockowilla or Ocklawaha ; the lands from which it is 
supposed a quantity of timber has been cut, and is about to be 
taken away, are a part of a tract claimed by Richard S. Hack- 
ley under a grant to the Duke of Alagon, and others, but which 
has not been recognized by this government. 

You are hereby appointed an agent for the preservation of 
timber on the public lands in East Florida, and will proceed 
without delay to the place above designated, and should you 
discover any person or persons cutting or carrying away tim- 
ber, or preparing to do so, you will order them to desist, and if 
necessary, to call upon the officers of the Army and Navy, who 
may be in the neighborhood, to prevent its removal. If at any 
time during the continuation of this appointment, you should be 
advised that depredations are committed or contemplated in any 
other quarters, you will use your best endeavors to protect the 
public property from injury. 

While engaged in this duty, or after its accomplishment, as may 
be most convenient, you will endeavor to ascertain, either by ex- 
amination or enquiry, the quantity and kinds of timber in that 
region of country, and report the result of your labors to the 
Department. 

In case of need you will call on the District Attorney for 
advice. 

You will be allowed for your services, four dollars per day, 
and the actual expenses incurred in travelling, the latter to be 
supported by vouchers. 

I am respectfully, &c. 
(Page 65.) SAMUEL L. SOUTHARD. 

The preceding is a correct copy of William D. Acken's ap- 
pointment. 

JOHN BOYLE, C. Clerk. 
January 20th, 1837. 

This commission of Mr. William D. Acken's, certified by the 
head clerk of the Navy Department, clearly establishes, that he 
was the authorized agent of the United States in Florida, and 
also, that he was instructed "to call upon the District Attorney 
for advice," and for the army and navy to support him. 

District Attorney's Office, E. F., May 10th, 1828. 
Mr. Wm. D. Acken, 

Dear Sir, — It has been frequently reported to me, that large 
quantities of live oak timber have been cut on lands in this dis- 



32 

trict, which are believed to he the property of the United States, 
and that particularly, a considerable quantity has been cut upon 
some tracts of land claimed by Mr. Francis Richard, under vhat 
are usually denominated jM ill Grants, which, together with many 
o'thers of a similar kind, have been (properly, as I conceive), re- 
jected by the Board of Commissioners constituted to ascertain 
claims and titles to land in East Florida. 

An Act of Congress of February 23d, 1822, provides that the 
President of the United States may employ so much of the land 
and naval force of the United States, as may be necessary ef- 
fectually to prevent the felling, cutting down or other destruc- 
tion of the timber of the United States in Florida; and also, 
to prevent the transportation or carrying away any such tim- 
ber as may be already felled or cut down, and to take such other 
measures as he may deem advisable for the preservation of the 
timber of the United States in Florida; and it does appear to 
me, that the crisis has arrived when this discretionary power 
should be exercised; prevention is said to be better than cure — 
a good maxim, and peculiarly applicable in this case, in which 
prevention is the only effectual remedy; for were we to resort 
to a suit to recover the value of the timber, the issue would per- 
haps be more than doubtful in a community whose prejudices 
and interests lean strongly against it, and if by chance a judg- 
ment was obtained, (the trespasser, who ere this, would have 
sold the timber and pocketed the proceeds) would not, perhaps, 
be worth the costs of the suit. That the President may be ena- 
bled to estimate rightly the strength of these claims, I would 
advise that you have that of Mr. Richard copied for his inspec- 
tion, and forward it to him, with a request that the command- 
ing officer of this post, be required to aid you with the necessary 
military force to prevent further trespass, and the removal of 
the timber already cut — for without the immediate adoption of 
energetic measures, these lands will in a short time be stripped 
of all their valuable timber, — the late decisions of the Board 
leading to facilitate the movements of the claimants. 

The government should never be without an agent in each 
district of this Territory, charged with the protection of the 
public domain; who should receive an adequate compensation 
for his services, and have at his command a competent military 
force, and who should be protected by an Act of Congress from 
law suits arising from his interference in the discharge of his 
duty, in all cases where a Judge of the Superior Court would 
certify that there was reasonable cause for such interference; 
and I would suggest that there are no persons who could attend 
to this duty with more convenience (or perhaps advantage to 



33 

the government) than the Marshals of the several districts, who, 
from the nature of their official duties, become acquainted with 
(and are frequently obliged to traverse) every section of the 
country. 

It may be advisable for you to proceed to the interior of the 
country, and visit the hammocks, where timber has been cut, 
and ascertain the quality, and by whom cut, and on what tracts, 
together with the facilities which the purchasers have for re- 
moving it; and if it is to be removed immediately, advise the 
purchasers to desist, until the pleasure of the Department is 
known — but if there is no means of transporting it before you 
have time to correspond with the Department, perhaps it would 
be unadvisable to make known the object of your mission at 
present. 

Before I close, I beg leave to add, that it will afford me great 
pleasure to render you every assistance in my power to facili- 
tate the discharge of the duties of your mission, which I con- 
sider of very great importance to the government. [p. 66, 67.] 
Very respectfullv, I am yours, &c. 
Signed THOMAS DOUGLASS. 

These instructions from the District Attorney to the Agent 
of the United States, expressly call his attention to Mill 
Grants, which Mr. Douglass says are believed to be the property 
of the United States; and he also directs his attention to the 
Act of Congress of February, 1822. This Act, we shall show, 
however illegal, directs the application of the law of 1807, 
which is thereby declared to be in full force in Florida, and 
which directs that no person shall use his own property under 
a Spanish grant until it is confirmed, except to the extent of 
320 acres, as a tenant at will of the government, " not to com- 
mit waste," as we shall presently show- 
Mr. Wm. D. Acken communicated these proceedings to the 
Secretary of the Navy thus. — This is a most important fact. 

Copy of a letter from Mr. Wm. D. Acken, to the Secretary of 
the Navy of the United States. 

St. Augustine, May 12th, 1828. 
Sir, — I arrived at this place the 9th inst., and understand 
there are several persons cutting live oak timber. Some of the 
lands on which they are cutting, are claimed under the title of 
Mill Grants, a copy of one of which I have taken the liberty to 
inclose you, which appear to me, if valid, would only authorize 
the grantee to cut pine timber. However, as they are making 
a general havoc of the timber in the province, not only under 

5 



34 

Mill Grants, but that of others, some of which have not as yet 
been acted upon by the Board of Land Commissioners, you will 
be pleased to inform me particularly how far I can, with safety, 
proceed, in order to prevent any evil that may arise therefrom 
— in the mean time, I will proceed to the different parts where 
they are cutting, and if about to remove the timber before time 
will allow me to receive an answer, shall in all events act by 
and with the advice of the District Attorney. / have called on 
Major Gates, the commanding officer, for aid if necessary, who 
informed me it was proper he should have an order from the De- 
partment to that effect, hut that he loould render any assistance in 
his power in the event of aid being required. 

I have been informed that there is no person cutting, nor has 
there been any live oak timber cut on the Ockowilla or Ockla- 
waha; however, I shall proceed forthwith to that point. Mr. 
Rodman, the Collector of this port, informed me he had receiv- 
ed instructions from the Treasury Department to send a compe- 
tent person to the above place, to ascertain the names of the 
persons, if any there be, who have violated the Act of 1st 
March, 1817, in order that the same may be enforced against 
them; but as one has not yet been sent, I will attend to that 
duty, and on my return to this place, inform you accordingly. 
It is expected that live oak will be cut by contractors for fur- 
nishing the same, on the western side of the peninsula next fall, 
in which event, I will be on the alert to supersede any trespass 
that may be attempted. The following is an extract of a letter 
from the District Attorney to me, viz: 

District Attorney's Office, E. F. May 10th, 1828. 

Mr. Wm. D. Acken — 

Dear Sir, — It has been frequently reported to me, that 
large quantities of live oak timber have been cut on lands in 
this district, which are believed to be the property of the United 
States ; and particularly that a considerable quantity has been 
cut upon some tracts of land claimed by a Mr. Francis Richard, 
under what are usually denominated mill grants : which, to- 
gether with many others of a similar kind, have been properly, 
as I conceive, rejected by the Board of Commissioners consti- 
tuted to ascertain claims and titles to lands in East Florida. 

The government should never be without an agent in this 
Territory, charged with the protection of the public domain ; 
and who should be protected by an act of Congress, from law- 
suits arising from his interference in the discharge of his duties, 
in all cases where a judge of Superior Court would certify that 
there was reasonable cause for such interference. 



35 

Before I close I beg leave to add, that it will afford me great 
pleasure to render you every assistance in my power to facili- 
tate the discharge of the duties of your mission, which I consider 
of very great importance to the government. 
I am yours, &c., 
Signed, THOMAS DOUGLASS. 

As my business will be chiefly in the eastern section of the 
territory of Florida, I request that you will permit me to draw 
on the Navy Agent of Charleston, S. C, instead of Pensacola, 
for my pay and travelling expenses as agent for the preserva- 
tion of public timber in East Florida, as in this section of the 
country a draft could not be cashed on the latter place. 
I have the honour to be, sir, yours, 

Most respectfully, 

WM. D. ACKEN. 
To the Hon. Samuel L. Southard, Secretarv of the Navy, Wash- 
ington City, D. C. [Pages 68 and 69.] 

The foregoing proves three important facts — 

1st. That Mr. Acken had called upon the military to sup- 
port him, as instructed. 

2d. That he would, " at all. events," act by and with the ad- 
vice ot the " District-Attorney," as directed. 

3d. That Mr. Rodman, the Collector oi Customs, was ordered 
by the Treasury Department to enforce the act of 1817. 

The following will exhibit that the foregoing was received by 
the Navy Department, and that Mr. Acken was positively or- 
dered again, subsequently, to follow the directions of the Dis- 
trict- Attorney, but the letter to that effect, like many others, as 
will appear from examining Mr. Acken's correspondence, has 
been suppressed. This extract was given by the Navy Depart- 
ment, as showing that Mr. Acken was under orders also to obey 
the instructions of the District-Attorney of St. Augustine. 

Extract of a letter from the Navy Department, to William D. 

Acken, Esq., agent for protection of live oak, &c., dated July 

1st, 1828: 

" You will use great vigilance in carrying into effect the im- 
portant objects committed to your charge, and in all doubtful 
cases refer to the District-Attorney, and follow his directions." 
(Page 208.) 

The above is a correct extract. 

JOHN BOYLE, C. Clerk. 

February 14th, 1837. 



36 

We will now show the law of 1807, and also that of 1817, to 
which Mr. Acken was referred by the District-Attorney, in his 
letter in May, 1828. It will also be seen hereafter that John 
Rodman, Esq., Collector of Customs at St. Augustine, was or- 
dered by several Secretaries of the Treasury to apply these 
laws to Spanish grants. In showing these acts of Congress, 
and calling attention to the fact that they are expressly directed 
by the act of 1822 to be applied to the Spanish unconfirmed 
grants, we will show their actual and stern application in the 
seizure and condemnation of the brigantine Planter and her 
cargo, consisting of live oak timber, cut from a Spanish grant, 
which has subsequently been confirmed to the claimants by the 
Supreme Court of the United States, known as the " Forbes' 
grant" 

United States ^ 

vs. * > 

The Brigantine Planter^ ) 

" The libel in this case set forth, that Wm. A. McRea, acting 
Attorney for the Middle District of Florida, in his proper per- 
son, &c., giveth the court to understand, &c., that on the 13th 
day of July, 1828, in the District, &c., a certain brigantine, 
called the Planter, commanded by one Samuel Swanton, did 
then and there take on board live oak timber, cut on the land of 
the United States, with intent to transport the same to some 
port of the United States. Hereupon process was prayed 
against the brigantine, &c., and that proclamation and monition 
might issue, &c., to show cause why said brigantine, her tackle, 
(fee, should not be condemned and sold. 

"The answer of Charles E. Sherman, agent for the owners 
and charterers of the brigantine Planter, traverses the allegation 
of the libel, that the said brigantine Planter did not at the time 
and place specified in the said libel take on board live oak tim- 
ber, cut on lands of the United States, with intent to transport 
the same, contrary to the statutes of the United States, &c., 
and the same does not in any manner violate the laws of the 
United States. 

" From the testimony in the case, it appears that the live oak 
timber taken on board the brigantine Planter, at the time 
charged in the libel, was cut on lands claimed by the United 
States, as part of the domain, near the west bank of the St. 
Marks, and within the boundaries of that part of Florida, com- 
monly known as Forbes' purchase, or claim. The testimony is 
clear and incontrovertible on this point, and indeed the claim- 
ants offered to dispense with proof and admit the fact, resting 



37 

their defence on the ground that the land in question not being 
public land of the United States, no violation of the statute has 
been incurred. 

"The judge, after reciting several acts of Congress, &c., asks, 
What has been the legislation of the United States on this sub- 
ject ? It will be needless to recite at large all the acts of Con- 
gress on this subject. A cursory reference to the most impor- 
tant of them will establish the fact, that the legislation of Con- 
gress has been conformable with the principles above stated. 
In the very first act of Congress, for the establishment of a Ter- 
ritorial Government in Florida, approved 30th of March, 1822, 
among the various acts which are therein declared, shall extend 
to and have full effect in the territory aforesaid, is an act to 
prevent settlements being made on lands ceded to the United 
States, until authorized by law, approved 3d of March, 1807. 
This is a very long act, and it will only be necessary to state its 
general effect and operation. It prohibits all persons from taking 
possession of, or making settlements on any lands, &;c., ceded to 
the United States by any treaty made with a foreign nation, 
&c., which lands shall not have been previously sold, ceded or 
leased by the United States, or the claim to which lands, by such 
person or persons, shall not have been previously recognized and 
confirmed by the United States. This is prohibited under pen- 
alty of forfeiture of all claim to such lands, by the person so oc- 
cupying or settling. It also prohibits the surveying or marking 
boundaries of any part of such land. It goes further, it pro- 
vides that all persons who shall have possessed, or made settle- 
ments under claims, prior to the cession to the United States, 
shall only be permitted to retain such possession, &c., by appli- 
cation to and permission from certain officers of the U. States, 
in the mode and on the conditions thereby designated. 

" The extent of land permitted to be occupied is limited to 
320 acres, and the conditions are to be such, as shall prevent 
any damage or waste on such lands. Further, this provision is 
limited to original claimants only ; persons violating this law are 
subject also to a penalty ; and the President of the U. States, 
through the judicial and military officers of the U. States, is au- 
thorized to eject any intruders. 

" Can any legislative act be more clearly expressive of the 
public will in reference to this subject matter '? By this act even 
claimants to grants of land, whose title and occupancy were an- 
terior to the cession to the United States, are deemed and taken 
to be mere tenants at will (to use an analogous law-term) of the 
U. States, and holding on prescribed conditions, and not permit- 
ted to do damage or waste." 



38 

And after reciting further acts of Congress, authorizing the 
employment of the land and naval forces of the U. States, says 
the Judge — 

" Do the United States not hold possession ? It must be either 
in the United States, in the claimant, or it must be derelict. 
The latter supposition would be absurd. Under the act of 3d 
March, 1807, specially and expressly applied to this territory, 
it is seen that claimants are allowed only a conditional, qualified 
occupancy to limited and definite quantities, and that for all of 
a larger, or unascertained amount, they are not allowed even 
this quasi possession. The possession, then, of those large grants, 
except to the extent above specified, can only be and remain in 
the United States, until a final decision had, &c. — they have 
uniformly acted as in possession so far as was required by the 
public interest, compatibly with what was due to the claims of 
others. They have treated those large grants of lands as pub- 
lic property, by ordering them to be surveyed to a certain ex- 
tent. True they were not divided by sectional lines ; but this 
resulted from the determination of the government to reserve 
them from sale, and was a mere act of forbearance. For aught 
that could have been done by any tribunal whatever. Congress 
might, in their discretion, have had the surveying completed, 
and ordered the lands to be sold. 

"And as regards their power and control over the subject, 
that was as effectually exercised and demonstrated in the action 
of the Legislature, as if a complete disposition had been made 
of the lands. 

"As to the argument drawn from the principles of the com- 
mon law — applicable to actions of trespass — and the position, 
that possession of the subject is essential to sustain such action, 
it may be satisfactorily answered, — 1st. That the common law 
remedy bears a very remote analogy to the present case, which 
arises under express legislative provisions, and on a subject only 
to be governed by legislative action. 2d. That if possession be 
necessary, such possession is proved to be in the United States. 

" On a consideration of the facts of this case, and of the laws 
applicable thereto, the judgment of the Court is, that in the case 
of the United States against the brigantine Planter, a violation 
of the 3d section of the Act of Congress of 1st March, 1817, has 
been committed both by the master and consignee of said brig- 
antine Planter, — and that the said vessel, her tackle, apparel and 
furniture, has become thereby forfeited to the United States, 
and the Court adjudge and decree accordingly," &.c. 

Such was the opinion and decision of the Court of Florida, in 
the condemnation of the brigantine Planter and her cargo, con- 



39 

sisting of live oak, in the year 1828. Can any reasoning be 
more explicit or positive than this, in showing in such an ap- 
plication of the various Acts of Congress as then recited, with 
the other measures resorted to by the officers in Florida, the 
entire and effectual dispossession of this claimant; also that the 
officers of this government at that period, considered that they 
were acting in accordance with the legislation and views of the 
government? And on such principles was the action of the gov- 
ernment based, until the Supreme Court of the United States, 
by its decrees, definement and construction of the Treaty exist- 
ing between Spain and the United States for the cession of Flo- 
rida, decided those acts as the clearest violation of individual 
rights. And who would dare to load his vessel with the timber 
from an unconfirmed Spanish grant after this? 

Mr. Douglass, the District Attorney of the United States, has 
furnished the following, a copy of the same is given under the 
seals and certificate of the General Land Office, and will be 
found among the original papers of the claimant. 

Mr. Douglass says in his deposition (at page 178) that by 
these instructions to him were issued by the General Land Office. 
"It will be seen that all lands in Florida, claimed under Spanish 
grants then remaining unconfirmed, were considered public 
lands, and to be treated accordingly." Now it will be recollect- 
ed, that Mr. Douglass was authorized to instruct Mr. Acken, 
and Mr. Acken ordered "to follow his directions," by the Navy 
Department. 

Land Office, August 12th, 1828. 

Sir, — Information having been received both by the Treasury 
and Navy Departments, and that extensive depredations are com- 
mitted on the public lands, by taking therefrom the live oak and 
other valuable timber; I am requested by the Secretary of the 
Treasury to call your attention to the instructions heretofore 
given on the subject. 

It is believed that a large portion of such depredations are 
committed, 

1st. By persons under cover of contracts with the claimarits 
of Spanish grants, dated subsequent to the period limited in the 
Treaty. 

2d. Under cover of contracts with the claimants of lands, 
whose claims have been regularly filed, but not confirmed by 
Congress. 

3d. Under cover of contracts with the claimants, whose claims 
have been confirmed either as valid under the Treaty, or as do- 
nations, but which claims are attempted to be located on lands 
not covered by the original grants or donations, for the double 



40 

purpose of obtaining better lands and disposing of the live oak 
timber. 

It is understood that the Courts in Florida have refused to 
sustain actions of trespass, brought by the United States, against 
persons who affect to claim under a Spanish cession, or under a 
donation from the United States. 

It is not believed that the refusal of the Courts can extend to 
cases coming under the 1st or 3d classes above mentioned. 

The claims of the first class, are declared by the Treaty to be 
invalid ; and the question which arises in relation to those of the 
third class, is not a question as to the validity of the title, but 
one of mere location, to be decided on record or oral testimony, 
as the case may be. It is therefore the wish of the Secretary of 
the Treasury, that in cases coming under the 1st or 3d class 
above referred to, where, from the representation of the agent of 
the Navy Department, or from other information, you have cause 
to believe that trespasses have been committed on the public 
lands, you will institute a suit against the trespassers. 

With respect to the second class, the Courts may probably 
entertain a doubt of the propriety of sustaining actions of tres- 
pass, so far as the validity of the title might be involved in the 
decision : but it is presumable, that on the representation of the 
agent for the Navy, that the claimants in these cases, were cut- 
ting down and striking off valuable live oak timber, essential for 
the use of the Navy, the Courts would grant injunctions to stay 
waste, until the validity of the title was decided ; and if they 
should refuse to do this, it is possible that they might be induc- 
ed to lay an injunction on the purchaser, prohibiting payment 
of purchase money, until the title of the land was decided — this 
latter case, if it can be effected in any way, would more proba- 
bly arrest the depredations on the public lands, and the destruc- 
tion of the live oak timber, than any other that could be devised. 

Should the Courts, however, oppose themselves to either of the 
modes above referred to, by which the live oak timber may be 
preserved for the government, you will then have recourse to 
the provisions of the Act of the last session of Congress, provid- 
ing for the settlement and confirmation of private land claims in 
Florida; and whenever a claimant shall avail himself of the 6th 
section of that Act, you will apply for an injunction to stay 
waste, provided you are advised by the agent of the Navy, or 
through some other authentic source, that the lands afford va- 
luable live oak timber, lying within five miles of navigable wa- 
ter. 

A copy of this letter will be furnished the Secretary of the 
Navy, who will issue the necessary instructions to his agent, 



41 

on whose information your proceedings will be principally 
founded. With, &:c. 

GEO. GRAHAM. 
To T. Douglass, Esq. 

These instructions, there is but little doubt, were issued, as 
will be seen in the correspondence of Mr. Acken (in the printed 
book, page 78) that after his return from Florida, in 1828, he ad- 
dressed a special letter to the Secretary of the Navy, making 
enquiry as to the pine timber — and says "it would be well for 
the Secretary to give instructions to the different Collectors of 
Florida, and to the Collector of St. Mary's, Georgia, whose dis- 
trict, he says, extends to Nassau river, toper?nit no vessel to clear 
with live oak or any other timber, without a certificate from each 
individual from whose land it was cut, and of the particular 
place from whence shipped, stating the particular tract, and 
whether it had been confirmed by the Board of Land Commis- 
sioners, or otherwise." 

Mr. Douglass, the District Attorney at St. Augustine, also 
thus addresses the Commissioner of the General Land Office 
on the 12th November, 1828. 

"I beg to refer you to the various communications made to 
the Navy Department by William D. Acken, agent of the United 
States, for the preservation of the public timber in Florida, who, 
I believe, writes by this mail to the Hon. the Secretary of the 
Navy on the subject." [Page 210.] 

It will be seen, (at page 149,) that Mr. Rodman, the Col- 
lector of St. Augustine, applied for instructions on these heads; 
and, consequently, that order was no doubt issued on the 14th 
August, 1828, as it says — "information has been received by 
both the Treasury and Navy Departments," &c. 

The following instructions, of corresponding character, have 
been returned by John Rodman, Esq., as being those which 
were issued to him. It appears, as before stated, that he was 
directed to apply the law of 1807 and 1817, to grants not '■•yet 
conjiiifned by our government." 

PP -1 Treasury Department, 

l-^^P^'-J April 22d, 1823. 

Sir, — It has been represented to this Department, that timber 
of great value has been taken from the public lands, and that 
the practice rather increases than dimishes. 

There is no law that makes it the duty of the Collectors of 
the Customs to restrain this practice. The Army and the Navy 



42 

appear to he the instruments, placed at the disposal of the Pre- 
sident, for the preservation of the public timber. 

It is, however, considered proper, that every civil officer 
should contribute to the execution of the law^ enacted for that 
purpose, as far as the correct discharge of his appropriate duties 
will permit. I therefore request, that you will not permit any 
vessel to clear out of your district, laden in whole or in part, 
with live oak or red cedar timber, without making such enqui- 
ries as may be practicable, to ascertain whether such timber 
has been cut from the public lands; if the information should 
not be satisfactory, it will be your duty to notify the command- 
ing military or naval officer of the district of the facts, and leave 
him to act upon the case according to the instructions which he 
may have received. 

I remain, with respect, your most ob't serv't, 
[Signed] WM. W. CRAWFORD. 

Collector of the Customs, St. Augustine. 

I, John Rodman, Collector of the Customs, and held that 
office on the receipt of the annexed letter, do hereby certify, 
that the annexed copy of the said letter is true and correct. 
JOHN RODMAN, Collector of St. Augustine. 

St. Augustine, January 7th, 1837. 

[copy.] Treasury Department, March 31st, 1828. 

Sir, — It has been represented to this department, that certain 
persons, in defiance of law, continue to fell, cut down, and carry 
away the timber on the public lands in Florida, particularly 
from lands situated on the Ochrowilla or Ochluwaha* river, a 
branch of St. Johns, and claimed by Mr. Richard S. Hackley, 
under the grant of the Duke of Alagon and others, lohich grant 
has not yet been confirmed by our government. 

I have therefore, to call your attention to the letter from this 
department of the 23d April, 1823, and to request that you will 
send a person in whom full confidence can be placed, to the river 
before mentioned, with instructions to ascertain the names of 
the offenders, in order that the provisions of the act of the 1st of 
March, 1817, may be enforced against them: 
I am, respectfully, 

Your obedient servant, 
(Signed) RICHARD RUSH. 

JOHN RODMAN, Esq. Collector, St. Augustine, E. F. 

* The true name is Ocklawalia. 



. 43 

I hereby certify that the above is a true and correct copy of 
a letter which I received from the Hon. Richard Rush, then 
Secretary of the Treasury. 

JOHN RODMAN. Collector of St. Augustine. 

St. Augustine, 1th January, 1837. 

V" Treasury Department, 4th December, 1829. 

'c>ir, — As there is reason to apprehend that waste is frequently 
committed on the public lands of the United States in the Ter- 
ritory of Florida, I enclose for your information, a printed copy 
of the opinion of Mr. Wirt, former Attorney General, on the 
subject. / 

It is conceived to be the duty of all persons in the public ser- 
vice, as far as possible, to prevent depredations on the public 
domain. For that purpose you should have an eye to the de- 
tection of such offenders, and from time to time communicate to 
the Attorney of the United States for your district, such infor- 
mation as may come to your knowledge, to the end that they 
may be prosecuted and punished. 

I am respectfully, sir, vour obedient servant, 
(Signed) S. D. INGHAM, Sec'ry of the Treasury. 

Collector of the Customs, St. Augustine, E. F. 

N. B. The above mentioned printed opinion of Mr. Wirt, is 
dated May 27, 1821. It relates to trespass on public lands gen- 
erally, and he refers to an act of Congress of 3d March, 1807 — 
and also to a decision of the Supreme Court of the United States, 
in the case of Dugan vs. the United States, 3 Wheaton Rep. 181. 

I, John Rodman, Collector of St. Augustine, do hereby certify 
that the annexed within letter to me, is a true and correct copy 
of one which I received from the then Secretary of the Treasury. 
JOHN RODMAN, Collector of St. Augustine. 

St. Augustine, 7th January, 1837. 

At p. 149, it is seen that Mr. Rodman applied on the 18 of June, 
1828, to know how the large grants were to be construed, espe- 
cially those for " mill seats," which had not been " confirmed," 
and says Mr. Aiken and himself would be glad to have instruc- 
tions. Now, it has been shown that soon after this, the order 
was issued from the General Land Office, in August, 1828, not 
to permit the cutting of "valuable timber, of any description, 
from grants not yet confirmed," and, as Mr. Douglass says, 
*' were ordered to be considered as the public property of the 
United States, and to be treated accordingly. 



44 

But the following will prove conclusively that a special appli- 
cation was made by the District Attorney of Florida, subse- 
quently to May, 1829, as to sanction the taking of pine timber 
for the use of saw mills, from these grants, and after mature de- 
liberation, as will appear from the difference of dates, the Sec- 
retary of the Treasury positively refuses to do so. 

Copy of a letter to S. D. Ingham, Secretary of the Treasury. 
General Land Office, May 29th, 1829. 

Sir, — I enclose a letter from Ringgold, the District Attorney 
for Middle Florida, urging a relaxation of the general instruc- 
tions relative to the depredations on the public timber,' so as to 
sanction the taking of pine timber for the use of saw mills, 
or for the purpose of supplying neighbouring settlements, 
towns, &c. 

I enclose you such parts of the correspondence with the Dis- 
trict Attorneys of Florida, as will enable you to decide as to the 
expediency of any further modification of the general instruc- 
tions other than those referred to in my letters to Mr. White 
and Mr. Wright, No. 9, and 12, which refer to cases where the 
property is taken for public uses, and where the benefit inures 
to the public. 

It may be proper to add, that the great mass of depredations 
committed on the public timber, arises from taking logs for saw 
mills, and bark for tanneries. The pine timber of Florida is 
considered better and more durable for all those uses to which 
that description of timber is applied, than any other pine of the 
growth of the United States. 

I am, &c. 
(Signed) GEO. GRAHAM, Com'r. 
To the Hon. S. D. Ingham, ) 

Secretary of the Treasury. ) (p. 210) 

Treasury Department, July Wth, 1829. 
Sir, — In answer to your letter enclosing one from Mr. J. G. 
Ringgold, and your correspondence with the District Attorneys 
of Florida, I would observe, that no sufficient reason is perceiv- 
ed for a further modification of the general instructions relative 
to the preservation of the public timber in Florida. 
I am very, &c. 

(Signed S. D. INGHAM. 

To Geo. Graham, Esq. i 
Com'r General Land Office, \ (p. 211) 

The act passed on the 2d of March, 1831, expressly and posi- 



45 

lively declares all the other acts passed in relation to timber, to 
be in force in Florida, and it will be seen applies to timber of 
every description — " live oak, red cedar, and other timber.'''' Ves- 
sels are to be seized attempting to load timber from grants not 
yet confirmed. "Captains are subjact to a fine of f 1000. All 
the hands cutting, are subject to prosecution, ^»e, imprisonment, 

The Attorney General of the United States thus wrote. (See 
Reports of Attorney-Generals, page 880.) 

Attorney-General's Office, ) 
June 9th, 1832. \ 

Sir, — In answer to your letter of the 18th May last, I have 
the honour to state, that under the act of the 2d March, 1831, 
where lands have been acquired by the United States, accord- 
ing to the provisions of that law, no person has a right to cut or 
remove timber from such lands, tipon the ground of any pre-emp- 
tion claim set up by him, until his title to the land claimed is 
either acknowledged by the government or maintained by the 
judgment of the Courts. The person, therefore, ivho cut and 
removed the timber, for the purpose of building the vessel, men- 
tioned in your letter, may be prosecuted, under the first section 
of the act above mentioned. But the vessel built of the timber 
improperly cut and carried away, cannot be libelled under the 
second section, unless she takes on board the timber contrary to 
the provisions of that section. 

To the.United States District-attorney, Key West, Florida. 

See also opinion of Attorney-General, page 859, where he 
says; "Under the act of Congress of March 2nd, 1831, 
to provide for the punishment of offences committed in cut- 
ting, destroying, or removing live oak, and other timber and 
trees, the penalty, not exceeding $1000, can be recovered, and 
the ship forfeited." 

Who will now deny that the questions, did the government 
of the United States positively and unequivocally interfere with, 
and Older the property of the claimant to be considered as the 
public property of the United States 1 and forbid and prevent 
the use of it ? and prevent the cutting of the necessary " mill 
logs " to supply his own saw-mills, or the live oak or other tim- 
ber to supply his contracts ? have been answered beyond cavil 
or doubt '( 

Seventh. We shall now show the proceedings of the agents 
of the United States, acting under their authority, in stopping 
the entire use of the claimant's " lands," " timber," and his 



46 

" saw-mills," and the consequent forcing its abandonment, under 
their positive and direct authority, and we respectfully ask any 
officer of the United States to show a single use that the claim- 
ant had of his property from November, 1828, until the Supreme 
Court of the United States confirmed his entire grants, in 1836. 

We would again wish it to be borne in mind, that now, at this 
period of interference, Mr. Samuel Grice had sent men to the 
claimant's 4,000 acre tract to cut his live oak, for which he was 
to pay him a clear cash profit of say 16,000 dollars, and simul- 
taneously, that the claimant had sent out engineers, millwrights, 
and machinery, and all the workmen to put up the mills, with 
eight gangs of saws, on his 10,000 acre tract, to saw his own 
pine ; and depending on his means, and his money from that 
contract, and his pine to saw in his mills, and his lands also, to 
afford him credit to sustain him in the uses for which the grant 
was made by Spain, expressly. On the free use and enjoyment 
alone of this, he relied, evidently, when he undertook this Flo- 
rida business. Besides, the government kept the claimant out 
of $2,538 which was awarded under the Florida treaty at this 
period, which they did not pay until fourteen years thereafter, 
making together nearly nineteen thousand dollars. 

We shall then submit that this is one of the greatest aggres- 
sions on individual rights that was ever perpetrated or commit- 
ted in this or any other country — to let an individual invest 
and waste his money, to the extent of thousands and thousands 
of dollars, in erecting mills — and then, in the direct violation of 
a solemn treaty, to drive him from his own property, and bring 
him to ruin, in spite of every remonstrance and application for 
relief, made to the Departments at Washington and to the offi- 
cers of government. But it was under both administrations, 
and from erroneous legislation of Congress, that this trespass 
was committed. 

The mill books and accounts will exhibit that the mill of the 
claimant was finished on the 11th of June, 1829, and that not a 
log of timber was brought to it from January until after July, 
1829, although the claimant wrote his agent to " bear in mind 
that the mills would require from 3000 to 4000 logs per month," 
as his letters hereafter will show. 

State of Pennsylvania., ) 

City of Philadelphia, \ 

Personally appeared before me, Samuel Grice of the said city, 
who being duly affirmed according to law, says, that some time 
in the summer or fall of the year eighteen hundred and twenty- 
seven, he entered into a contract with Charles F. Sibbald, of 



47 

the said city of Philadelphia, for a large quantity of live oak 
timber, which he stated he had on a tract of land in Mosquito 
county, East Florida — same fall he sent out his brother, Joseph 
Grice, with a gang of hands to commence cutting on said tract ; 
but owing to the difficulty in finding the lines in time, and the 
lowness of the water in the Lagoon, no landing was effected, 
and he had to look elsewhere for timber, at an immense sacrifice 
of time and expense. The ensuing fall of the year 1828, he re- 
corded at the Register's Office, at St. Augustine, his contract 
with said Charles F. Sibbald, and was about to cut on his tract, 
when he was forbid doing so by Mr. Acken, the Government 
Agent, who told him he would be compelled to seize the timber, 
and thus prevented, he (Joseph Grice) was compelled to look 
elsewhere for timber, as his letter of 29th November, 1828, will 
show; the letter hereunto attached being received from his 
brother at that time. And further states, that in consequence 
of the notice of said Acken, Mr. Charles F. Sibbald has been 
put to considerable loss and inconvenience, as this deponent be- 
lieves — he, the deponent, having sustained a very considerable 
loss himself, in being thus prevented from cutting timber on the 
aforesaid tract of land. 

SAMUEL GRICE. 

Affirmed and subscribed, this ninth day of November, A. D. 
1835, before 

PETER HAY, Alderman. 

St. Augustine, November 29th, 1828. 
Dear Brother — 

I wrote you in haste on the 26th, since which I have 
had the contract with Sibbald recorded. Mr. Acken called on 
me yesterday, said he understood I was about to cut on Mr. 
Sibbald's grant at Mosquito, and forbid me cutting it — said that 
if I did so, he would be compelled to seize the timber, as the 
grant was rejected by the Land Commissioners — says it is what 
is called a mill grant, and that Mr. Sibbald has no right to it. I 
immediately called on Mr. Rodman (the Collector) according to 
your instructions — he has advised me not to cut the timber; 
says that if I do, I will subject the vessel and cargo to seizure, 
and myself to a prosecution. He thinks that Mr. Sibbald is en- 
titled to the land on the St. Johns, where he huilt the mill, but 
not to that on Mosquito. It appears by the report of the Re- 
ceiver and Register, that the grant was given him merely for the 
pine timber on the land, such as he chose to saw up, but that he 
has no claim to the soil, or any other timber except the pine ; it 
is considered by the Commissioners here as belonging to the 



48 

United States. I shall therefore not commence cutting there 
until I hear from you. Mr. Acken has stopped the cutting of 
live oak on all the mill grants, and has seized some timber. I 
shall have timber enough on Burlow's tracts to last us four or 
five months, or perhaps longer. I have this moment returned 
from the Land Office, and find that Bulow's property is ac- 
knowledged a good title, so that there will be no difficulty in 
that. I am in treaty with a Mr. Ormond for live oak ; his tract 
adjoins Bulow's, and the title is good. There has been a quan- 
tity of timber cut off" his tract, but a good deal may be got there 
yet, and it is immediately adjoining our camps. I offered him 
16 cents for the timber, which offer he did not accept; but I 
may perhaps get it from him on my return for 181 cents. I will, 
however purchase it of him as soon as possible, as we w^ill not 
have to move the camps to cut it, which will be a great advan- 
tage (and more particularly as we cannot cut on Sibbald's.) I 
expect Mr. Rodman will write Sibbald on the subject. 
Hoping to hear from you soon, I remain 

Your affectionate brother, 

JOSEPH GRICE. 

There is evidently an error as to Mr. Rodman expressing 
this opinion of the 4,000 acre tract. 

The land commissioners herein referred to, it will be remem- 
bered, never were authorized to act in grants exceeding 3500 
acres. 

The following affidavit is merely a preliminary of what we 
shall show hereafter, to draw attention to the facts of the ag- 
gression committed on the claimant's mills, which will be sup- 
ported by the testimony of many witnesses, taken by the Trea- 
sury Department after this was made. 

State of Pennsylvania, ) 

City of Philadelphia. ) 

Personally appeared before me, Charles Snowden, of the city 
of Philadelphia, who being duly sworn according to the law, 
deposes and sayeth, that in the year of our I^ord one thousand 
eight hundred and twenty-seven, he went to East Florida, ac- 
comj3anied by Charles F. Sibbald, (of the said city of Philadel- 
phia, merchant,) a number of mechanics, workmen, and other 
persons, for the purpose of erecting steam saw mills on the lands 
of the said Charles F. Sibbald, on the river St. Johns, at a place 
now called Panama ; that subsequently he was agent for the 
said Charles F. Sibbald, who erected during his abode there, 
three steam mills, one of which worked forty-eight saws, and 
which by the books of the said Sibbald, cost between eighty and 



49 

ninety thousand dollars ; that after erecting these mills, the 
agent of the government of the United States would not permit 
the said Sibbald to cut or use his timber from off his own lands, 
to supply the said mills to saw, threatening this deponent as 
agent, with arrest and imprisonment ; that he put every possi- 
ble obsticle in the way of the said Sibbald, to his manifest in- 
jury ; that the said grievances and outrage were communicated 
to the said Sibbald by letters by this deponent ; that the said 
Sibbald had a contract to supply Mr. Samuel Grice of the said 
city of Philadelphia, with a large quantity of timber, to be cut 
by the said Grice off of the lands of the said Sibbald, and that 
the agent of the government of the United States prevented the 
said Grice from cutting and executing the said contract, thereby 
depriving the said Sibbald of a very large amount of funds ; 
further this deponent sayeth not. 

CHARLES SNOWDEN. 
Sworn to before me, 
this eighth day of April, 1835. 

PETER HAY, Alderman. 

Copy of a letter from John Rodman, Esq., Counsellor at Law, 
and Collector of the Customs, St. Augustine, East Florida, 
dated at Jacksonville, lltli December, 1828, to Charles F. 
Sibbald of Philadelphia. 

Dear Sir, — I am here attending Court, and have seen your 
agent Mr. Snowden, who requested me to write to you on the 
subject of your contract with Mr. Grice for the cutting of live 
oak timber on a part of your grant for a mill seat. This gen- 
tleman called on me a few days before I left St. Augustine, and 
showed me his contract with you, and mentioned that Mr. 
Aiken, agent for the Navy Department of the United States, 
now here, had forbidden him from cutting any timber on the 
lands held under your grant. I had previously seen Mr. Aiken 
on the subject, and though I am of opinion that your grant will 
be ultimately confirmed — he acts under the opinion of the Dis- 
trict Attorney of the United States, in St. Augustine, which is 
repugnant to mine. 

The District Attorney has given to Mr. Aiken his written 
opinion, that all the grants for mill seats, until confirmed by the 
government, or decided by the jadiciary as valid, are to be con- 
sidered as public property of the United Slates. Under this 
opinion Mr. Aiken has already seized some timber cut upon a 
grant of this nature, and loould undoubtedly seize any that 
Mr. Grice might cut on any part of your grant — that is live 

7 



50 

oak or red cedar timber — and Mr. Grice would also be exposed 
to a prosecution under an act of Congress, imposing a penalty 
of five hundred dollars, and six months imprisonment, on any 
person cutting timber on the public lands. Under these cir- 
cumstances I believe that Mr. Grice iviil not proceed under his 
contract loith you. 

I am extremely sorry for these untoward circumstances, but 
I know of no other remedy than to proceed with all possible 
despatch, to have your grant confirmed. 

Very respectfully, your obedient servant, 

JOHN RODMAN. 

The agent of the United States Navy Department, Mr. 
Aiken, in a letter to the Secretary of the Navy, dated " Jack- 
sonville, Dec. 18, 1828," thus apprizes the Secretary of his stop- 
ping Mr. Grice from cutting the timber of the claimant. 

" I have by the advice of the District Attorney, prevented as 
far as possible any timber being cut on land, the titles of which 
are not settled, especially the mill grants. On one of which, 
viz. Charles Sibbald's, of 4000 acres in TurnbuU's Swamp, on 
the Mosquito river, south of St. Augustine. It appears he has 
sold the timber to Mr. Samuel Grice, a contractor with the 
Navy Department for live oak. On hearing of the sale of the 
timber by Mr. Sibbald, I requested Mr. Grice to desist from 
cutting, until the claim to the land was confirmed by the United 
States, &c. You will perceive by the report of the Register 
and Receiver of the Land Oflice, at St. Augustine, for the year 
1827, at the 18th page, that they have recommended a private 
act of Congress in his case, for 10,000 acres on Trout Creek, 
St. John's river, not to that in TurnbuU's Swamp, or Rowley's 
hammock." 

Thus at one sweep, by actual threats, did the agent of the 
United States cut off sixteen thousand dollars in money from 
this claimant, as it is seen that the threats so terrified Mr. Grice 
that they drove him from the claimants premises, and which 
sum would have been received, as the mills were finishing in 
June, 1829. 

The following copy of a letter from Charles F. Sibbald to 
Charles Downing, Esq., Register of the Public Lands, St. Au- 
gustine, East Florida, is published in consequence of reference 
being made to the report of the Register and Receiver at St. 
Augustine, in the letter attached to the affidavit of Mr. Grice, 
page 9. 



51 

Letter Book B. — page 96. 

Philadelphia, December 5th, 1828. 

Sir, — I have recently been handed the report of the Register 
and Receiver of St. Augustine to the Treasury Department of 
the United States, M^herein I find my mill grant reported by 
them for confirmation in equity — for this I am much obliged ; 
but as the general impression given in the report in relation to 
those grants is such as to prejudice the parties interested, I hope 
you vi^ill pardon the liberty I now take in begging your refer- 
ence to the certified copy of mine, and the literal translation of 
the same on file in your oflfice. In the year 1816 the constituted 
and lawful authorities of the King of Spain, it will be found, in 
order to "encourage industry," increase the resources of the 
revenue of the country, grant me in absolute property (on the 
compliance of a stipulated condition, to wit, the erection of a 
saw mill) five miles square of land, without discriminating either 
its quality or i's " timber,''^ The soil (" tierra") contained in that 
extent of boundary, in one or more surveys, is granted, which 
in conformity was allotted me by the Surveyor General of that 
then province, George J. F. Clarke, Esq. 

That my title is legal cannot be questioned, according to the 
laws, usages^ established customs and policy of the Spanish na- 
tion, which liberality in land grants still exists throughout their 
colonies and dominions. I cannot call in question the rights of 
others. It was on the faith of this grant, looking to it as secu- 
rity for my " funds and labours," that I have been influenced to 
expend upwards of $40,000 in erecting three steam and water 
mills on my survey in that territory, and also have devoted so 
many years of my life to these objects. I know of no instance of 
any grant made by the Governors of Florida being revoked by 
the superior authority. Mill grants were made as far back 
as the year 1801. During my residence in Florida, about 
fifteen years, I feel persuaded no instance occurred in which 
the limits of the power of the Governors in granting lands 
were called in question. It is an uncontrovertible fact, that 
the privilege of cutting ^^ pine trees," was given by asking 
for it, without limit, neither was the bounty of the govern- 
ment confined to any particular grovi^th in species of timber. 
In my grant the soil (" tierra") is evidently given, and in 
other similar grants, permit me to say, that the soil could not 
be given for the foundation to erect a mill on without giving an 
unlimited right to the soil within the whole boundary of the 
grant. It is expressed " in order that the grantee may avail 
himself of its timber," without specifying any particular species 



52 

or growth, which, as the timber never ceases to grow, makes it 
a grant in perpetuity. These latter remarks will apply pretty 
generally to those grants. May 1 beg the favor of you to refer 
to my grant and to correct the impressions given, and which 
you may see it merits under every consideration ; as each case 
will now soon be brought before the Supreme Court. You will 
oblige me by so doing, also by addressing the Treasury Depart- 
ment, lest some interference of the agent of the government on 
my surveys might prejudice my personal interest, and conse- 
quently thereby that of the government of the United States, 
as I am deeply interested in this matter. 

Your early attention will oblige, 

Yours, very respectfully, 

CHARLES F. SIBBALD. 
CHARLES DOWNING, ESQ., 
Register of Public Lands, St. Augustine. 

Copy of a letter from Charles F. Sibbald, to Joseph M. White, 
Esq., Delegate from Florida, at Washington. 

Philadelphia, December 26th, 1828. 
Dear Sir, — I duly received your favour of the 17th inst., and 
in conformity, have addressed Mr. W. My anticipations, from 
information I had then received, have been realized respecting 
the government agent. Mr. John Rodman informs me per mail 
this day, that Mr. Grice, the brother of Samuel Grice, Esq., of 
this city, with whom I had contracted for live oak, on one of 
my surveys obtained under my Mill Grant, has called on him to 
say that the agent of the government of the United States had 
forbidden him to cut any timber on my land, — that he had seen 
the agent, who told him that he was acting on the opinion of 
the United States District Attorney, at St. Augustine, (which 
is reverse to his.) Mr. Rodman says "the District Attorney has 
given Mr. Acken, the government agent, his written opinion, that 
all grants for mill seats, until confirmed by the government, or 
decided by the judiciary as valid, are to be consider as public 
property of the United States." You some time since made a 
remonstrance (for me) to the Treasury Department ; by which 
you also was of opinion that the government had no right to in- 
terfere with any lands covered by a Spanish grant, until a deci- 
sion against the claimants should be made. I know that you, 
as the representative of the people of Florida, will not see their 
rights violated, and their property sacrificed with impunity. — I 
beg leave, therefore, to submit for your perusal, the literal trans- 
lation of the grant under which I hold as mine, three surveys in 
Florida, surveyed by authority of the Spanish government, in 



53 

conformity with the spirit and meaning of the grant, by their 
SurveyorGeneral, George F. Clarke, Esq. These surveys have 
been held by me, under this grant, for nearly twelve years; the 
condition of the grant complied with three-fold, and on the faith 
of it, I have disbursed forty thousand dollars, for which 1 am 
without reimbursement. After I have improved and disposed of 
it as my own, at so large a pecuniary sacrifice, and am now told 
it is to be considered as " the property of the United States" — 
these iniquitous proceedings, violating the eighth article of the 
Treaty with Spain, that guaranteed that private property should 
be respected. 

At this moment my outlay of money is so great for my Flo- 
rida business, which I am carrying to such extent, that this step 
of the government is not only calculated to subject me to heavy 
damages from Mr. Grice, but to affect my credit, and otherwise 
injure me in the most serious manner; subjecting his vessels to 
detention, and to throw forty men out of employment, which are 
now at Mosquito. May I beg of you, therefore, to represent 
my case to the Secretary of the Treasury, as one quite different 
from those in general under the denomination of Mill Grants; 
and I do not hesitate to say, that I have expended more money 
in complying with the conditions of my grant, than all the land- 
holders in Florida. 

As this is a matter of so much importance to me, as Mr. 
Grice has called on me to know what is to be done, and as it is 
a subject that will admit of little delay, you will very essential- 
ly serve me, and also the Territory, by giving it your attention, 
and having the order countermanded. 

I am, dear Sir, very respectfully, 

Your obedient servant, 
CHARLES F. SIBBALD. 



Hon. Joseph M. White, ^ 

Delegate from Florida, / 

Washington City. ) 



Copy of a letter from the Hon. Joseph M. White, Delegate from 
Florida, to Charles F. Sibbald. 

Washington, Dec. 30th, 1828. 
Dear Sir, — I have received your letter of the 26th instant, 
and concur fully in opinion with you. I do not think a claim- 
ant to land under the treaty, can be holden responsible for cut- 
ting timber on the land until it is decided to be public property 
by the Supreme Court. I have so written to the Treasury, but 
they will leave it to the Court I apprehend. 

I am your most obedient, 

JOSEPH M. WHITE. 



54 

Extract of a letter from Charles F. Sibbald, to John Rodman 
Esq., his counsellor at law, and Collector of the Customs at 
St. Augustine, East Florida. 

Philadelphia, January 5th, 1829. 
" I addressed you on the 5th ultimo, enclosing my petition to 
the Court, respecting my Mill Grant, and was duly favoured 
with yours of the 11th ultimo, from Jacksonville, acquainting 
me of the infamous procedure on the part of the agents of the 
government of the United States, — who, in violation of the 
Treaty of Cession of Florida, have infringed on the rights of in- 
dividuals which that treaty declared should be respected and 
observed to the same extent that they would have been, had the 
government of Spain continued in that Territory; but how dif- 
ferent is the case! when that of Spain gave its subjects permis- 
sion to cut timber, without limits, by asking for it; and the 
other shows a disposition to take from individuals that which 
they have fairly obtained and possessed for an elapse of so many 
years. On the receipt of your letter, I immediately addressed 
Mr. White (Delegate from Florida) respecting these iniquitous 
measures; and as he made a remonstrance, at my instance, to 
the Secretary of the Treasury in July last, against these pro- 
ceedings, I was in hopes that he would be enabled to show the 
injustice of them to the Secretary, and have instructions in con- 
formity sent to the agent (of the government.) In this, I have 
been disappointed; and Mr. White writes me, although it is 
contrary to his opinion, yet he apprehends they will leave it to 
the Courts. Immediately on the receipt of Mr. White's letter, 
I addressed Mr. Berrien. I did this, to endeavour to be so re- 
presented at Washington as to get the order to the government 
agent countermanded, as also to allow Mr. Grice to proceed in 
his contract, as the consequences to both of us will otherwise he 
serious. I requested you to proceed against the government if 
he interfered with Mr. Grice, by instituting a suit in my behalf 
for damages, provided you approve of such a measure. No 
doubt, the Report of the Receiver and Register has influenced 
this opinion of the District Attorney, on which the government 
agent is acting; but, perhaps, your personal representations of 
my case, might cause him to revoke his opinion as respects my 
claim, so as to permit Mr. Grice to proceed — otherwise, it is 
very evident, we shall have to seek remuneration, if they persist in 
stopping Mr. Grice.^^ 

We are now coming to a point of this case that will almost 
stagger the belief of any citizen of the United States, and that 
perhaps, in foreign countries would not be credited at all. That 



55 

is, that a citizen of the United States is seen in possession of a 
property which he has owned for twelve years, and has exer- 
cised acts of ownership over his own property, where he has 
built mills again, again and again; three several mills, the agents 
of the government stand by, and drive him from cutting a log of 
his own pine timber to supply those mills! ! We shall prove it 
beyond a shadow of doubt, to the mind of the most incredulous. 
If, then, stopping you entirely from cutting your own timber, 
where you have built mills on your own lands to saw it, is " di- 
rect interference," or "direct loss, or direct injury, there will be 
no proof wanting as far as evidence is available. 

The Attorney General has " directed" that " if it be proved, 
that the interference of a government agent, directly and neces- 
sarily stopped the working of the mills, or produced their des- 
truction, the measure of the damages must then he ascertained on 
the probable nett proceeds of the mills for the time during which 
it was so prevented from working, or the true value of the mill, 
not the price of construction." Of these instructions, we shall 
speak hereafter. 

The saw-mills, as has already been shown, which the claim- 
ant commenced simultaneously with the expedition of Mr. Grice 
to Mosquito, to cut the live oak on ; the $16,000 of which he 
relied on receiving in the Spring, as fast as it could be cut,, to 
afford funds, in addition to the other resources which his pro- 
perty would afford him, worked eight gangs of saws, and we 
shall show, have actually cut in twelve hours, 112 logs. The 
great solicitude of the claimant to have an adequate supply of 
logs, need not be stated; suffice it to say, that his letters urged 
on his agent that from 3000 to 4000 logs per month would be 
wanting, and the claimant's agent's letter, which will hereafter 
be shown, as written to the Collector of the Customs of St. Au- 
gustine, dated " Panama Steam Saw-mill, East Florida, May 
15, 1829," contains this extract: — 

"As the mill will be ready to start in about three weeks, and 
I have not, or will not have 500 logs, I see no alternative before 
me, but an absolute stoppage of the whole concern, unless some 
plan can be devised of furiiishing logs, to me, at present, un- 
known." 

The copy of this letter is furnished by the Collector of the 
Customs at St. Augustine, under oath, as written to him at that 
time by the agent of the claimant, and as the agent was address- 
ing similar letters to him at Philadelphia long previous, we sub- 
mit, whether here was not a circumstance calculated to strike 
terror into the boldest spirit, or to crush the stoutest heart ? We 
respectfully submit, whether many would not have been struck 



56 

down, paralized, — and incapable of further exertion, under such 
circumstances 1 But the claimant knew his fate — he could fore- 
see the miseries of being shipwrecked, and all the horrors of 
failure, worked on his imagination. Those horrors have all been 
realized — and he has suiTcred for years and years! — and yet at 
this day, is not a denial, a delay of justice, adding crime upon 
crime — might we be excused for saying — insult to injury? But 
let us go on and prove it, and let others judge. It will be seen, 
that the claimant's letters most strenuously urged the cutting of 
logs, from the month of December, 1828. In March, his letters 
were more urgent, and he orders his agent. Captain Snowden, 
to confront every difficulty, to defy the government agents to 
the utmost; and he did so — "until he was compelled to yield 
and submit." 

Extracts of letters of instruction from Charles F. Sibbald to 
Charles Snowden, Esq., his agent at the Panama Saw-mills in 
Florida, alluded to in his deposition. (Page 93.) 

(Letter BookB, page 154.) 

March 28th, 1829. 
"I this day received yours of the 15th inst., and now hand in- 
voice, bill of lading, and charter party of the brig Fair Trader, 
captain Lecraw, which vessel is chartered by me to proceed to 
Panama, there to discharge her outward cargo ; thence to pro- 
ceed to New Switzerland to take in the timber bought of Mr. 
Fatio, (unless you have sufficient to load her at Panama,) then 
to return to Panama, and take in 600 feet of live oak timber, if 
you are certain there will he no diffictdty with the government 
agent, — then complete her loading with ranging timber {on Mon- 
creef^s creek) as before advised by mail ; and as before advised, 
I hope you have, in conformity to what I have requested, sent 
a gang with our teams to cut and haul on our premises — this 
would very soon influence persons to take contracts, showing 
them we are not entirely dependent. If not already done, on 
receipt of this, you will please have it attended to, near where 
Mr. Watson settled, or elsewhere on my premises, as may be 
most convenient. I think Mr. Richard would be disposed to 
contract for mill logs, and he may be depended upon to any ex- 
tent, — he has land of undoubted title. You will not delay in 
making contracts, and in making them payable at ninety days 
or four months in every instance ; in the interim, the parties 
will take up large quantities of goods, of which I will send out 
large supplies when the mill starts." 



57 

(Letter Book B, page 157.) 

March 31st, 1829. 

"You may put 50 per cent, on many articles of dry goods; 
crockery, glass, earthenware, furniture, and tin-ware, ought to 
bear 50 or 100 per cent., to pay the breakage, and for bulk of 
freight, — also cutlery, especially pen knives, which are liable to 
rust. On the receipt of this, I wish you to put a gang on my 
own premises to cut mill logs; let them cut them 18, 20, 30, 35 
and 40 feet long. I presume, as I some time since requested 
this, and there is a backwardness in persons coming forward to 
contract, you have done so; if not, delay not one day; I will 
show them if they cannot furnish mill logs at $3 per M., I can. 
When I exhaust my own, I can buy more lands. You need not 
be guided by any one, but send where Watson is settled, along- 
side of his house, if necessary. There send provender for the 
teams, and let Mr. Mills go occasionally and see that the hands 
cut a regular task. If our own teams are not sufficient, employ 
also Mr. Hogan's, and if necessary, buy four or five yoke of 
oxen. I perceive, plainly, after all my outlays, if we do not 
adopt some plan of this kind at once, the mills and thirty or 
forty men will be idle for want of logs; this will be ruinous, and 
I have begged a contract would be oflfered to Mr. Richard ; he 
would execute, and would not, I think, wish any out of the way 
price. As soon as people see my determination and ability also 
to supply myself, they will come forward freely; as I do not 
wish a day to elapse without this being done, although I have 
written fully on the subject by the vessel, as this might reach 
sooner, I repeat it. In any thing of mine, you may bid the gov- 
ernment agent defiance ; I tell you so, and you may communi- 
cate it to him if he attempts to interfere on my premises. 

P. S. I have written you about the contracts with Mr. 
Sully, per brig; you may contract with him for 2000 logs at $3 
or $3.50, but nevertheless, send a gang of our own to depend on, 
four or six men; this concerns me most, a want of logs; to have 
thirty men idle and the whole capital, would be dreadful; so 
much per thousand is the only equitable way of contracting for 
both parties, subject to a rigid inspection." 

(Letter Book B, page 165.) 

April 6th, 1829. 
" I wrote you about mill logs, which you have, no doubt, at- 
tended to. Mr. Sully informs me the hay was all gone ; as I 
sent two and a half tons out per Pomona, this will show you the 
necessity of employing our teams and wheels in getting timber 

8 



58 

on my own premises, — I should say logs, — we must economise. 

Please inform me how many horses are on the place, also oxen, 
and how they have been employed." 

These are extracts of letters from the claimant to his agent at 
his mills then erecting at Panama, Florida. Now what do these 
letters exhibit? 

The fact that previous to the interference, he was cut- 
ting live oak from his own land, "600 feet that was directed to 
be put on board the brig Fair Trader, Captain Lecraw, provid- 
ed there would be no difficulty with the government agent, 
which vessel took not one foot; also that we had been cutting 
pine "ranging timber on Moncreef's creek" previous to that 
interference. Ranging timber is so called, from being squared 
with the range of the tree, that is, to make it as large as the 
tree will square at each end, and generally runs from 15 to 18 
inches square, and tapering from 12 to 15 inches at the small end. 
These letters show a more important fact than these — that is, 
that as early as the first of March, that Mr. Snowden was ac- 
quainting the claimant of the great difficulty in getting mill logs 
from the fears created, and terror so evidently manifested, by 
the impossibility at that period, even of getting persons to con- 
tract. Mr. Saowden is directed to send near where Watson is 
settled, on Six Mile creek, or elsewhere on the claimant's pre- 
mises, to cut the necessary mill logs for his mills, — and see his 
great solicitude. " I perceive, plainly, after all my outlays," 
"the the mills and 30 or 40 men will be idle for want of logs." 

Mr. Snowden, on the 23d of April, 1829, answers these letters 
of the 2Sth and 31st of March and 1st of April, as regards mill 

"I notice your remarks concerning my joining Mr. Sully in 
getting mill logs, and will abandon it, but in reply will candid- 
ly answer, yes; that I could do you justice as an agent, and my- 
self also. Yes, I should have had as rigid an inspection over 
mill logs that I was concerned in, as any other persons, most as- 
suredly, &c. 

" Mr. Sully has commenced cutting, and has turned his whole 
attention tp it. I have been trying to get a gang of men, as you 
say, to cut on your premises, but do not think there will be any 
difficulty in getting logs. 

" The government agent has been here, and forbid me cutting 
on your trait. Ibid him defiance, and took a hand in his pre- 
sence, and commenced cutting ; he rode off and said he would 
lay a power of injunction on me. I have not heard the result 
yet, but expect to in a few days. I will see Mr. Richard, (as di- 
rected,) but know he will not contract," &c. 



59 

Mr. Snovvden, at that period wrote, that Mr. Sully was cut- 
ting, and alludes to the claimant having written him as to his 
being concerned on his private account with him, and thought 
his agent could not do justice to him as his agent and himself 
also, and, therefore, relinquishes his interest. This will account 
for the letter of Mr. Acken, written to Messrs. Sully & Snow- 
den. Mr. Sully was then cutting on a Spanish grant, and Mr. 
Acken "sezzerf" the logs. Thus, is here proved, the infamous 
interference of the United States agent, going on the claimants 
own lands, a mill grant derived from Spain, where the claimant 
had built three saw mills since he owned the grant, carrying 
out the very intentions of the Spanish government in making 
the grant, and the authorized agent of the United States goes 
upon his property that he has owned for twelve years, and in- 
terrupts his work, in the presence of his agents, clerks, mecha- 
nics, labourers, and captains which are sailing to the ports 
where his commercial agents reside, and carry thither this in- 
telligence. 

Look at the next two letters, exhibiting the fact of two ves- 
sels being there, the one of which came to Philadelphia, the 
other to New York. 

[Letter Book B, page 171.] 

May 1st, 1829. 
" The schooner Maiden, Capt. Stewart, is chartered with 
thirteen running lay days ; but fear from a letter from Mr. Sul- 
ly and one from Mr. Seton, that she will be detained at a ruin- 
ous demurrage. Please to bear in mind that we want from 3000 
to 4000 mill logs per month." 

[Letter Book B, page 173.] 

May 12th, 1829. 
" The Fair trader, I trust, will not be on demurrage. Re- 
specting the ' Government Agent,' some by-contractors, or 
those wishing to furnish logs, have been at the bottom of it (in 
getting him to stop you from cutting mine ;) you will apply, of 
course, to Mr. Rodman, my attorney at St. Augustine, whom I 
shall address, and Mr. Berrien, lo have that gentleman, if possi- 
ble, arrested. I am glad Mr. Sully has eniered into the busi- 
ness of supplying logs ; in him I have confidence ; also if Mr. 
Richard would contract it would relieve my mind." 

These letters show that " 3 a 4000 mill logs were wanted per 
month ;" the claimant warns his agent " to bear this in mind." 



60 

The next letter is dated 

Panama Saw-Mills, ) 

May 7th, 1829. \ 
Mr, Snowden writes thus, " The govef mnent agent has 
(again) been here, and forbid me cutting mill logs. 1 put him 
at defiance, and made a hand immediately cut before him, near 
the mill, and told him J would continue on; he then said he 
would have to, if no other way, endeavour to get an order from 
the Judge to put me in the fort. I replied, until I was put there, 
if he could get it done, I would go on — and will, &c. It will 
be a relief to me there, &lc. Mr. Rodman says go on, I will." 

Now this letter evinces the fact that the agent of the United 
States threatened to imprison the claimant's agent, who had at 
that period applied to Mr. Rodman; but we shall presently 
show a subsequent letter to the Collector of Customs, dated 
May the 15th, 1829. 

The next letter from Mr. Snowden is dated 

Panama Saw-Mills, ) 

May, 1829. \ 

He says, ^*As regards mill logs, I am very sorry to inform you 
the government agent has put every obstacle in the way. Mr. 
Sully had near 1000 cut on Turner^s tract ; another of the 
Turner^s had a quantity ; also, Worley and one or two others ; 
all ready to deliver, but every one has been stopped by the agent. 
He also came to the mill again, and forbid me cutting, but I 
paid no attention, and sent a hand to cut near the mill, and to- 
morrow send a gang out near Moncreef's Creek. He told me 
if I did pursue it, he would have to get an order to put me in the 
fort. I told him to do his best, I would cut on. I have from 
Hogan's 500, part delivered." (These were probably delivered 
prior to January, 1829, and were cut from an American dona- 
tion, at a place near the mills, called ' Waverly.') 

" And had no other alternative but to get Warren and Sully 
to cut on Watson^s land, with this condition, that if it proved to 
be your land, he should pay so much a log, and if his, I would 
pay ^3,50 per acre. The United States District-Attorney, Mr. 
Douglass, at St. Augustine, has put a piece in the paper, forbid- 
ding any person cutting pine timber, until claims be decided. 
Sully and Warren will keep us going, but I am afraid we shall 
have some difficulty with the agent yet." 



61 

Here is a letter communicating the most important facts, 
from the agent of the claimant at his mills in Florida, to the 
claimant in Philadelphia. 

That " the agents of the United States had put every ob- 
stacle in the way " of the claimant's undertaking in Florida. 
Could any words carry with them stronger evidence of the ex- 
tent of the inteiTuption, of the enormity of the trespass ? A mill 
of immense capacity to execute, calculated to cut a hundred 
logs per day, on the point of completion, and to stop the owner 
from cutting his own logs to supply it; also to stop " every one'^ 
else that is attempting to do so. And who wei^e these persons ? 
— the Mr. Turners, and Mr. Worley — why persons who had 
possessed and lived on their lands for years before the change 
of flags, with grants from Spain, which they had owmed, culti- 
tivated, and enjoyed. Ask the old inhabitants of Florida who 
those persons are ? Ask the public officers themselves, and if 
they even say that they were compelled by their instructions to 
violate a sacred treaty, they will, nevertheless, affirm this ; and 
as the next letter from Mr. Snowden to the claimant will show 
that these cuttings of mill logs were all stopped on grants, as he 
says, made m the day of Governor White's life time, prior to the 
year 1809. And, says Mr. Snowden, '^ I have no other alter- 
native but to get Warren and Sully to cut on the Watson tract, 
&c." 

But those words are too important to pass unexplained. Mr. 
Snowden says, " I have no other alternative.'''' What does this 
mean ? Why that he is driven off" from cutting the timber on 
the claimant's mill grant, and is forced to make a bargain with 
a person, the relative of Watson, who actually got a donation of 
640 acres of the claimant's own lands, from the United States, 
as public property, and is forced to make an arrangement with 
Mr. Warren, his relative, and Mr. Sully, to cut the pine timber, 
as he says, with an understanding, if the claimant's rights shall 
thereafter be established over it, to make a deduction. This is 
the interpretation and the clear import of those words ; also, it 
is proved that his agent is threatened to be imprisoned at that 
time. 

And Mr. Douglass did advertize that " his instructions ex- 
tended not only to live oak and cedar, but to timber of every 
description, for the purpose of shipping, for the use of sawmills, 
&c., but not to apply to timber for fuel, or for plantation pur- 
poses," as Mr. Carlyle says, page 46 ; and see the letter ad- 
dressed to the Collector of Customs, at St. Augustine, by the 
agent of the claimant at that period, which here follows : — 



62 

Panama Steam Saw- Mills, ) 
East Florida, May, 15th, 1829. ) 
John Rodman, Esq. 

Dear Sir, — Having made contracts with several persons 
for mill logs lately, and they having commenced cutting, have 
been stopped by Mr. Acken, the /United States agent, on the 
ground that their several grants (though made by Governor 
White) were invalid, from not having been confirmed by that 
inquisitorial and usurped tribunal, the Land Commissioners. 
Mr. Acken has also positively forbid my cutting a log from the 
mill grant, declaring it to be his determination to cause to be 
immediately arrested, myself or any other persons contravening 
his sublime commands. 

As the mill will be ready to start in about 3 weeks, and I 
have not, or will not have, at that time, more than five hundred 
logs, I see no other alternative before me, but an absolute stop- 
page of the lohole concern — unless some plan can be devised of 
furnishing logs to me, at present unknown. 

I had formed a resolution to employ a gang of hands forth- 
with, to cut on the mill grant — but on reflection I have con- 
cluded to await your advice on the subject, which I request 
you will give me, by the return of the mail, stating therein your 
ideas on the subject fully, particularly as to the consequences, 
according to law, of such measures being pursued. 1 have had 
lumber cut from the mill grant, and shipped, as Mr. A. well 
knew, (from the fact of my having called his attention to it,) 
but he took no steps to stop the vessel or to prosecute me, that 
I know of, as yet. 

I also wish you to inform me whether my presence is neces- 
sary in St. Augustine, during the trial of the mill case — if so, 
state when, and if Mr. Sibbald has not requested you to do so, 
cause G. J. F. Clarke, Esq., and Judge Bethune to be summoned 
as witnesses. 

I am, dear sir. 

Yours, very respectfully, 

CHARLES SNOWDEN. 

City of St. Augustine, in East Florida, ss. 

John Rodman, attorney and counsellor at law, in said city, 
and holding the United States office of Collector of the Cus- 
toms, for the district of St. Augustine, and which office he has 
constantly held since the cession of Florida to the United States 
in the year 1821, — being duly sworn, doth depose and declare, 
that the written instrument hereto annexed, is a true copy of a 



letter which he duly received from Charles Snowden, as agent 
of Charles F. Sibbald, of Philadelphia, who was the owner of a 
saw mill and sixteen thousand acres of land, on which the said 
mill had been built, by the said Sibbald, conformably to the 
terms of the Spanish grant of the said land, the original of 
which letter from the said Snowden is still in the possession of 
this deponent, on file in his office. On the back of which letter 
it is stated that the said letter was answered by this deponent 
on the 18th May, 1829, three days after its reception — but as 
this deponent kept no copy of his said answer, he does not now 
precisely recollect the particular contents of it. But this depo- 
nent well remembers that he had several interviews at his office 
with the said Mr. Acken, mentioned in the said letter from Mr. 
Snowden, as the agent of the United States, on land claims in 
East Florida, about the time mentioned in the said letter from 
Mr. Snowdan, of his stoppage of the cutting of any timber on 
land, for which the claims had not been finally confirmed by the 
government of the United States, The said Mr. Acken openly 
declared to this deponent, that by his express instimctiojis 
from the United States government, and also by Mr. Doug- 
lass, the l)istrict-%fittorney of the United Slates in this dis- 
trict, that he, the said Jicken, was bound, in performing the 
duties of his office as United States agent, to prevent, by all 
means, the cutting of any timber on land claimed by a pos- 
sessor under any Spanish grant, if the said grant had not yet 
been confirmed by the government cf the Unite L States. That 
the said Acken made frequently in East Florida a similar decla- 
ration, is a notorious fact ; and if he now denies it (as this depo- 
nent has been informed that lately he has denied it) he then 
asserts a barefaced falsehood. * 

JOHN RODMAN. 

Sworn to, this 23d day of ) 
January, 1839, before me, ) 

GEO. L. PHILLIPS, Justice of the Peace. 

This is the testimony of one of the highest officers of the gov- 
ernment in Florida, and evidently a favourite officer, who has 
held his post of office from the time the flag of his country first 
waved over that territory, which became part of the United 
States, by a solemn treaty protecting those private rights, which 
he has thus shown to have been assailed and invaded. It is a 
matter of regret to have to bring to view such a document as 
this, but the denial of Mr. Acken of the commitment of the fla- 
grant acts of duty imposed upon him, has rendered it essential 
to bring this document, here, to light. 



64 

Now it will be recollected that this letter of the agent of the 
claimant to the Collector of St. Augustine, is his second applica- 
tion to him in the course of a few days, as he said, in his letter 
of the 7th of May, that he had written Mr. Rodman, and this 
letter of the 15th of the same month is furnished by the Collec- 
tor, under oath by him ; and we shall presently show his reply. 

See what Mr. Snowden says — 

First, that all " have stopped from cuttinsj mill logs on Span- 
ish grants, on the ground that these several grants (though 
made by Governor White) were invalid, from not having been 
confirmed." 

Secondly. He says, " I see no alternative before me hut an ab- 
solute stoppage of the whole concern." 

We leave others to judge what must have been the claimant's 
situation, after expending such an immense sum of money in 
erecting mills, induced exclusively by his Florida possessions, 
and to have his mills within three weeks of commencing their 
operations, and not " 500 logs" at his control, when he expected 
5000 would not much more than last a month ; and here, too, 
when he needed all his funds, to have iSl6,000, just before this 
more serious interference, completely cut off, by stopping Mr. 
Grice. 

In the month of November previous, that blow was inflicted, 
— that fatal blow, — cutting off such an amount, and with it the 
injury to the commercial credit of the complainant, making the 
loss the greater, as exposed in the letter to the Hon. Joseph M. 
White in December, 1828. — It was a most fatal stroke to him. 
And then, just as the mills are finishing, to have these accumu- 
lated injuries, so unlooked for, in preventing him, or others, from 
cutting the mill logs to supply them. We would ask again, 
whether many would not have been cut down at once — para- 
lized, and incapable of exertion. But this claimant, with energy, 
yet tried to brave the storm — to contend with these elements, 
and confront all difficulties, and save his ship from shipwreck. 
He writes to the departments — to the officers of the government, 
as we have shown, and as we shall show hereafter, and to no 
purpose whatever; and we would respectfully submit this ques- 
tion to the masters of the law. . 

If, at this period, the claimant had abandoned, instead of even 
waiting until forced off, as we shall hereafter show, would his 
claim for every consequence produced, not have been equally 
binding upon the government; would they not have been com- 
pelled to respond to the whole as binding upon the United States, 
— if he had then submitted at once to the authority of the au- 
thorized agents of the government? 



65 

But let us exhibit the next letter of Mr. Snowden, after the 
application to the Collector at St. Augustine. It is dated "Pa- 
nama Steam Saw-mills, Florida, May 28, 1829." 

He says, " the government has, and is giving all the trouble 
he can to this concern, as I before wrote you, and has stopped 
a quantity of pine logs; the d — d scoundrel, let them cut until 
they got a lot, and then forbid them taking them away — how- 
ever, Sully and Warren arc drawing on rapidly where Watson 
lives. (This is the donation of 640 acres made by the United 
States ot the claimant's own land, and actually confirmed to 
him.) I have also got a gang cutting near the mill; so am in 
hopes, will be able to keep ahead. Mr. Richard cannot con- 
tract, and if he did, I belieie the agent loould stop him. 

I have wrote to Mr. Rodman, that he had forbid me cutting 
on the tract — but I should go on at all risks, and had told the 
agent so. I have since received an answer from Mr. Rodman, 
he says, he does not believe that Acken has any authority from 
the government to seize any timber cut upon any land for which 
legal grant has been made, although the grants may not have 
been yet confirmed. Noio all that has been stopped, there has 
been, and they show a legal grant for. Mr. Rodman also 
writes me, that Mr. Acken called upon him, and seems determined 
to stop me from cutting if he can — he says if I cut any, he loill 
procure a corps of infantry from the garrison here and seize it. 
But I shall cut on in defiance, and only submit to a superior 
force, and Mr. Rodman thinks I have a right to do so. I pre- 
sume he will, of course, write to you fully." 

We will add a letter also from Mr. C. Sully, dated " June 
11th, 1829." He says 

" Acken appears to have a strange antipathy towards this es- 
tablishment, and throws every obstacle in the way. I had cut 
600 logs off of Worley's and Turner's land, and should by this 
time have had 1000 ready, but Mr. Acken forbid the owners 
cutting any more, so that my whole force was stopped and all 
my logs lost, and I put to great trouble and expence. I have 
now between 500 and 600 logs ready, and shall commence raft- 
ing tomorrow, and if the weather permits, and if I can get more 
force, hope to deliver 1000 per week. My expenses and disap- 
pointments have been great," &c. 

The mill starts to-day or to-morroiv, but unless logs come in 
faster I dread the consequences, Capt. Snoivden is truly loor- 
ried out and fretted to death, &c. Write me, as to the proposi- 
tion I made of cutting logs off of your land, as I sincerely hope 
you will put Acken at defiance," &c. 

9 



66 

Mr, Sully also, it appears by the following, superintended the 
hands in cutting on Six Mile creek, who were driven off. 

Thomas Stephens, of the city of Philadelphia, then employed 
as blacksmith at the mills, has also recently given the following 
testimony: "I engaged with Mr. Charles F. Sibbald, in Decem- 
ber, 1828, to work as blacksmith in erecting a steam saw mill 
and other smith work in that way, at Panama, in East Florida. 
Mr. Sibbald asked me if I understood ship work, as well as mill 
work, and mentioned his intention of building shipping, and that 
I would be called on to work at ship smith work as well as mill 
smith work. After I had been there, I found that there was 
pine timber as well as live oak, &c. To the best of my recol- 
lection, the saw mill could run twenty saws. I think it did not 
require less than forty logs a day to keep the mill in operation. 

"I know of an agent of the United States coming on Mr. Sib- 
bald's properly, and forbidding the labourers to cut any more 
timber. I know that he forbid them cutting any more timber, 
and ij' they did not leave directly, he would tie the negroes up 
and whip them ; and they came to report these circumstances to 
the agent. Captain Charles Snowden. Mr. Chester Sully was 
the man who directed the negroes in their work in cutting on 
Six Mile creek at the time, on Mr. Sibbald's lands. The spot 
where Mr. Sully was cutting I have marked with the letter B, 
and indicated by an ink line on the map hereunto annexed." 

" I understood, that all the lands on that side of the creek be- 
longed to Mr. Sibbald, and as shown by the draft annexed. 
When the report was brought down that the agent had stopped 
them from cutting, Mr. Sully went to bring the logs down that 
were cut, he was forbid to touch any of them. I know the logs 
were there, and I saw some ten years afterwards, in 1839, when 
I was there. When I saw them in 1839, some of them were 
very much rotted, and some partly burnt, in consequence of the 
burning of the underwood. The men employed at the works 
talked about this matter a good deal, and thought it hard that 
Mr. Sibbald should suffer such loss; and we expected that it 
being done in this high way, it would stop Mr. Sibbald's busi- 
ness. Every person seemed anxious on behalf of Mr. Sibbald, 
knowing that the land was Mr. Sibbald's, and thinking that he 
ought to use his own property as he thought proper. The la- 
bourers that came in were so terrified, that they woidd not dure 
to lift another axe!" 

Let us revise these two most important letters of Messrs. 
Snowden & Sully, the one dated on the 28th of May, 1829, the 
other the 11th of June, 1829. 



67 

It is true, that Mr. Snovvden was instructed, and did resist 
the United States agent for months, thus meritoriously, en- 
deavouring to maintain the authority of his employer over his 
own property, against the aggression, a trespass, of the most ag- 
gravated nature. 

The claimant built his mills on his own property, and his let- 
ters ev nee that he expected those mills to cut " 3,000 or 4,000 
logs per month." Mr.Snowden, on the IStliof May, 1829, writes 
the Collector of St. Augustine, " the mills will be ready to start 
in three weeks. I have not, nor will not have at that time more 
than 500 logs, and see no alternative before me, but an absolute 
stoppage of the whole concern, unless some plan can be devised 
of furnishing logs, to me at present unknown." 

In this last letter of Mr. Snowden's, he informs the claimant 
that Mr. Acken is in St. Augustine, " that Mr. Rodman writes 
him he has called upon him, and seems determined to stop him, 
and if he cuts any more, that he will procure a corps of infantry 
from the garrison, that is subject to his command by his com- 
mission, and seize it. Mr. Acken evidently went to St. Augus- 
tine, to devise some plan with the District Attorney of putting 
an end to the business. Mr. Snowden still says in his letter, 
that he would not surrender, and would submit only to a supe- 
rior force. 

But Mr. Acken, well knowing that we were dependent on the 
labour of those who dare not resist him, and he comes again to 
the mills to renew the combat — he goes into the woods where 
the claimant's operatives are cutting mill logs — he lays violent 
hands upon them, threatens to tie them up and whip them if 
they cut another tree — and, in the impressive words given by 
Mr. Stephens as taken by Alderman Hay, " they were so terri- 
fied, they would not dare to lift another axe." [See evidence of 
Thomas Stephens, James Rice, George Colt, Charles Snowden.] 
He also seized his mill logs. 

Mr. Snowden comes to Philadelphia to acquaint his employer 
that he had been compelled to surrender. The mill was finish- 
ed, says Mr. Sully, on the 11th of June, 1829. The accounts 
exhibit that the workmen were sent home. The letter of claim- 
ant (page 160) to John Rodman, Esq., mentions the fact of Mr. 
Snowden being in Philadelphia in August, 1829. Mr. Sully 
says in his letter on the 11th of June, " iV/r. Acken appears to 
have a strange antipathy toioards this establishment,''^ and throws 
every possible obstacle in the way. I had cut 600 logs off of 
Worley's and Turner's place, and should by this time have had 
1000 ready, but Mr. Acken forbid the owners cutting any more, 
so that my whole force was stopped and all my logs seized and 



68 

lost, &,c. The mill starts to-day or to-morroio, bat unless logs 
come in faster, / dread the consequences. Captain Snowden is 
truly worried out and fretted to death. / sincerely hope you 
ivill -put Acken at defiance. 

Now let us ask any one to explain this letter written on the 
11th of June, 1829. Was the mill finished, does it say? Was 
3Ir. Acken then present, or at Jacksonville, four miles ofi'1 he was. 
Mr- Sully would have said Mr. Acken had a strange antipathy, 
and if he was gone, why would he " hope''' we would put him at 
de^ance? No, he was present ; and was this not manifest to any 
one from that letter: ought the result not to be looked for? Af- 
ter that date, he drove the labourers of the claimant off. Mr. 
Acken himself, says in his testimony, (at page 57,) that " he was 
at the mills on the 20th of June, 1829," and about the 1st of 
July, 1829, he embarked on board the schooner Warrington at 
Nassau Inlet, ten or fifteen miles north of the mills, on the St. 
Johns river, and arrived at Norfolk previous to the middle of 
July. He then went to Washington, and wrote his official let- 
ter to the Secretary of the Navy, dated the 20th July, 1829, and 
relating to the claimant's property, saying that he had " stop- 
ped the cutting, and thereby saved a valuable lot of timber for 
the government," &c. 

It is, therefore, obvious that Mr. Acken was the known au- 
thorized agent of the United States in Florida, until the last of 
June 1829. It has been proved that he was duly commissioned 
— that the acts performed were in strict accordance with his 
instructions — emanating immediately from the departments at 
Washington, and that those departments derived their authority 
under an act of Congress of February, 1822, applying the law 
of 1807 directly to the Spanish grants then remaining uncon- 
firmed, as stated by the District Attorney at page 178, and or- 
dering them " to be treated as the public property of the United 
States." 

On the 15th June, 1829, Mr. Mason, under a charge of the 
Administration, was appointed at the Navy Department to suc- 
ceed Mr. Acken, as will be hereinafter seen by his commission, 
which will establish the authority vested in him to be of an 
equally stern and grave character, and placing the troops of the 
United States and the naval forces at his command, to enforce 
his authority. 

Mr. Mason was frequently at the mills ; and thus no farther 
attempts were made to cut the timber. 

The following was written by the claimant to his agent : — • 

Philadelphia, June 8th, 1829. 
" I shall write to Washington, meantime (as regards catting 



69 

logs) you will be advised by Mr. Rodman, — until the difficulty 
is removed, I must submit." 

At this critical moment, the following was addressed to the 
Attorney General of the United States. 

L. B.— folio 187. 

Extract of a letter from the same to the Honorable John Mac- 
pherson Berrien, Esq., then at Washington. 

Philadelphia, June 13th, 1829. 

My agent in Florida writes me by last mail, that the agent 
of the government of the United States is placing every possi- 
ble obstacle in my way — that he has forbid his cutting pine 
timber (to supply my saw mills) on my survey held for thirteen 
years — he has threatened him with imprisonment, and to bring 
a detachment of United States troops from St. Augustine to take 
possession of my property ; after permitting persons to cut large 
quantities of timber on other grants for me, when on the point 
of removing it, he has prevented them ; thus after expending up- 
wards of forty thousand dollars, I find an obstacle placed in my 
way, which, if not removed very speedily, is calculated to in- 
jure me in the most serious manner. That the government of 
the United States will sanction such a violation of our rights, I 
cannot believe, as the treaty declares that private property shall 
be respected in the ceded territory. 

Will you be pleased to advise me how to proceed, or to re- 
present the matter at Washington, that the agent may be in- 
structed to desist. I assure you I have by these means, since 
October last, been deprived of seven or eight thousand dollars, 
which I should have received from my live oak contract with 
Mr. Grice, and could now establish heavy damages against the 
agents (and government.) 

This letter was written to Judge Berrien at that period, in 
consequence of his having then agreed to act for the claim- 
ant on the trial of his land case in the Supreme Court — 
which engagement was made prior to his appointment as At- 
torney General. But he replied that this, although a question 
connected with these lands, was one which his situation as 
Attorney General would not permit him to interfere in. 

The official letters from the agent of the United States in 
Florida, apprizing the government at Washington of his instruc- 
tions from the District Attorney at St. Augustine, and his pro- 
ceeding with regard to the claimant's property, has already 



70 

been exhibited, and it shall now be shown that he also appears 
to have apprized the navy department of the seizure of the mill 
logs, cut for the use of the mills. 

On the 7th of May, 1829, Mr. Acken wrote to the Navy 
Department as follows, — but the letter of the 7th, herein men- 
tioned, he has kept from view — nevertheless it will not be diffi- 
cult to see its contents, from the following reply — which shows 
that such a letter was written on that date. 

Navy Commissioners' Office, 21st May, 1829. 
Sir, — Your letter of the 7th inst. with its enclosures, has been 
received. 

The Commissioners request that in your reports to this office 
of timber seized by you, which has been cut on lands claimed by 
the government, you will as far as practicable, state the pur- 
pose for which such timber maybe suitable, which information is 
necessary for the Commissioners to possess, to aid them in such 
further orders that they may see proper to give. 

I am, very respectfully, Sir, your ob't serv't. 

(Signed) L. WARRINGTON. 

Mr. William D. Acken, ) 
Jacksonville, Florida, \ 

It will strike the mind of any one as conclusive, that that let- 
ter was on the subject of the pine mill logs, " cut on land claim- 
ed by the government." The letter says, " the Commissioners 
request that in your reports to this office of the timber seized by 
you, you will state the purposes for which such timber is suit- 
able." 

The Navy Commissioners too, evidently understand the use 
of Zeue oak timber, which they are constantly procuring, to as- 
sume that it was live oak that this letter of the 7th of May re- 
fers to, and that there was no other timber " seized," and that 
pine was the claimant's mill logs, as communicated in the letter 
of that day from his agent. 

But it has been said, and already answered, that Mr. Acken's 
commission was revoked, as appeared by a Congressional docu- 
ment "on the 27th May 1829." 

Is it not extraordinary that that circumstance was wholly 
unknown at the Navy Department, subsequent to that period, 
when they were still corresponding with Mr. Acken, as the 
agent of the government. See the following letter, furnished by 
Mr. Acken himself (Page 19 printed documents.) 

Navy Commissioners' Office, 5th June, 1829. 
Sir, — Your letter of 20th ultimo, with its enclosures, has been 



71 

received. None of the points embraced in your letter, except- 
ing the price to be charged to Palmer & Ferris for the timber 
cut by them on the public lands, knowingly and intentionally, 
coming under the cognizance of the Board, they have been re- 
ferred to the Secretary of the Navy. You will ascertain and 
report to this Board the quantity of live oak timber cut on the 
public lands by Palmer & Ferris, knowingly, after they were 
warned off by you, and cause the same to be marked, that it 
may be designated, — informing us of the marks. The price 
which these tresspassers will be required to pay, will hereafter 
be decided ; but you will inform them that other considerations 
besides those of lenity, will be taken into view in forming such 
decision. 

The Board have recommended to the Secretary of the Navy to 
give you such instructions, and invest you ivith such authority, as 
will put it in your power effectually to prevent all further tres- 
pass. 

I am. Sir, respectfully, your ob't serv't. 

(Signed) L. WARRINGTON. 

Mr. Wm. D. Acken, St. Augustine. 

St. Augustine, June 23rd, 1829. 
Sir, — Your letters of the 21st ult. and 5th inst. have been re- 
ceived. All the points alluded to were in a fair way to be ac- 
complished, but having received a letter from the Hon. Secre- 
tary revoking ray appointment, I have had to stop proceeding. 

Thus the letter, revoking Mr. Acken's appointment, could 
not have left Washington until about the 10th of June, 1829. 
Mr. Acken himself has testified that the last time he was at the 
mills was on the 20th of June, 1829, and until the 23d of June, 
1829, he was acting officially, and was the known, authoriz- 
ed agent of the government in Florida. He took passage in 
the schooner Warrington about the first of July, when he 
left the vicinity of the mills, embarked at Nassau bar, from 
ten to fifteen miles north of thence, and arrived at Norfolk 
previous to the middle of July ; and immediately after his ar- 
rival at Wasiiington, addressed the following official letter to 
the Secretary of the Navy, which will be found at page 90 of 
printed documents. 

Navy Yard Hill, Washingtox City, ) 

July 20th, 1829. \ 
Sir, — Enclosed you have the orders for the property of the 
United States, left in East Florida by me, late agent for the 



12 

preservation of timber on Public Land in that place, part of 
which was purchased by me to carry into effect the duties of 
that office; also an invoice of timber shipped from Doctor's 
Lake, St. Johns River, on board schooner Philadelphia, by 
Messrs. Seabury and Brown, contractors for live oak wiih the 
Navy Department, now at this Navy Yard, that being a part 
of a lot of timber stopped by me on a tract of land claimed un- 
der a title to Raphael Olivares. For further particulars on this 
subject, I refer you to my letter to the Hon. the Secretary of 
the Navy, dated St. Johns River, E. F., lOtli June, 1821 ; also 
to one to the Secretary of the Treasury from John Rodman, 
Esq., Collector of the Customs of St. Augustine, shortly after- 
wards. 

I would take the liberty of stating to the Department, that 
there remains a quantity of different kinds of timber at different 
places in East F,orida, that has been stopped by me, being satis- 
fied that it was cut on lands properly belonging to the United 
States, as well as about two hundred and sixty sticks of red 
cedar at St. Johns Bluff, stopped by Mathew Jenkins, Esq., 
Surveyor of the Customs on St. Johns Riv^er — fifty-seven pieces 
live oak timber, bonded by Messrs. Wrightman and Buck, re- 
maining unshipped on Black Creek, St. Johns River — four 
pieces ditto unhauled at same place, not included in the bond, 
measuring 194 feet cubic, and about 2000 feet, cut down and 
not worked, lying in the hammock. Thirty-six pieces live oak 
on Black Creek, St. Johns River, claimed by Mr. Chester Sul- 
ly, measuring about 900 feet, — he having refused to give bonds 
for it, subject to the decision of the Navy Department, it re- 
mains unshipped, liable to be destroyed by fire, &c. ; also, 
about 600 pine logs, cut on Trout Creek, St. Johns River. 

By Messrs. Palmer and Ferris, contractors for live oak with 
the Navy Department, a quantity of live oak timber has been 
cut to moulds on Mill Swamp, head of Nassau River, lying be- 
tween lands confirmed to the heirs of E. Waterman and Joseph 
Sumerland : also, at Ozzar's Bluff, head of Nassau River, 762 
feet, four and two-thirds inches cubic — of this quantity, 440 feet 
one inch and a half, has been shipped to Boston, which has not 
been accounted for to government ; also, sixty-six pieces cut to 
moulds, and twenty-six trees felled, not worked, at a place call- 
ed Plumer's Swamp ; this being the timber that was cut after 
they were legally required to desist by me, informing them that 
it was public land. 

In addition to the above, I have just received a letter since my 
arrival here, from the County Surveyor of Duval, which may 



require some personal explanation — I shall be happy to do so, if 
conceived necessary. 

I would further observe, that Mr. Charles Sibbald, of Phila- 
delphia, has sold to Mr. Samuel Grice, the timber on a tract of 
land containing 4000 acres, on Turnbull's Swamp, Mosqueto 
River, and conceiving, as I have always done, that he had no 
claim to the land, I have prevented them cutting it, and have 
thereby saved a valuable lot of timber, and think it well worth 
calling the attention of the Department to that point. For fur- 
ther particulars, I refer you to the Register and Receiver's Re- 
port to the Treasury Department, as Land Commissioners, of 
1827, under the head of Mill Grants. 

The agents of Mr. Sihbald, at a Steam Saw Mill on Trout 
Creek, have, J have very little doubt, embraced every opportu- 
nity to cut on lands to ivhich they had no right, and encou- 
raged others to do the same. 

I have the honour, sir, to be 

Your ob't serv't, 
Signed, W. D. ACKEN. 

To the Hon. John Branch, Secretary of the Navy, Washington 
City. 

" Enclosed," says Mr. Acken, " you have the orders for the 
property of the United States left by me in Florida, <^c. I 
would take the liberty of stating to the Department, that there 
remains a quantity of different Imids of timber at different places 
in East Florida, stopped by me, satisfied that it was cut on land 
properly belonging to the tJnited States. 

" I would further observe, that Mr. Charles F. Sibbald, of 
Philadelphia, has sold to Mr. Samuel Grice the timber on a 
tract of land, containing 4000 acres, in Turnbull's Swamp, 
Mosqueto River, and conceiving, as I have always done, that he 
had no claim to the land, I have prevented themjrom cutting it, 
and have thereby saved a valuable lot of timber, and think it well 
worth calling the attention of the Department to that point." 

Now here is an officer of the United States, acting under 
their authority, offcially communicates the fact, " I have pre- 
vented Mr. Charles F. Sibbald from cutting the live oak on his 
4000 acres at Mosqueto, conceiving, as I have always done, that 
he had no claim for the land, and have thereby saved a valuable 
lot of timber, ^^ and says as much as " I have saved it, now I call 
your attention to take care of it hereafter ;" he then writes with 
a fresh memory, and says nothing of the quantity being as many 
feet as he mentioned at another time. 

10 



74 

But see the conclusion of his letter, *' that the agents of Mr. 
Sibbald, at a steam saw mill on Trout Creek, I have very little 
doubt, embraced every opportunity to cut on land to which 
they had no right, and encouraged others to do the same." 
What land did he then allude to, but the mill grant, and the 
mill logs. He wrote then with a fresh memory, and the deeds 
which he had committed, by virtue of his authority, were 
foremost in his thoughts. 

But Mr. Thomson Mason too soon took his place and post as 
another sentinel of the government to allow us any repose or re- 
lief, as we shall show presently, and that his commission was 
dated June 16, 1829 ; and also, that as to the " manner of per- 
forming his duty, he is to consult with the District Attorney, 
and to act in accordance with his advice." 

The Supreme Court in Strother vs. Lucas (page 437) says, 
" no principle can be better established by the authority of this 
Court, than that the acts of an officer to whom a public duty is 
assigned by his King, within the sphere of that duty are prima 
facie, taken to be within his power ; the principle on which it 
rests, are believed to be too deeply formed in law, and reason, to 
be ever successfully assailed." 



The claimant will now resort to the testimony to support the 
truth of this argument, and as to what the agents of the United 
States did at the saw mill establishment. 

The first witness is the agent of the mills at that eventful 
period, who came to Philadelphia, as is shown by the letter to 
John Rodman, Esq., Collector of Customs, dated August 31st, 
1829, at page 161, soon after the final aggression of Mr. Acken 
in June, 1829, in driving off" his labourers by force or violence, 
and actual threats of" bodily injury," until the said agent of the 
claimant was compelled to submit, as is proved by the following 
testimony, 

CHARLES SNOWDEN, Esq., of Philadelphia, the agent of 
the claimant at his mills, gives the following answer to the 3d in- 
terrogatory, page 11, on the part of the United States. 

" Mr. Sibbald was dispossessed of his lands, and prevented 
from using them from the year 1828 to 1836, when his title to 
the lands was confirmed by the Supreme Court of the United 
States. He was, during this time, prevented from cutting tim- 
ber for the use of his mills — both pine timber and oak — to exe- 
cute his contracts. He was dispossessed by Mr. William D. 
Acken — he was commissioned by the Navy Department. He 
was the most active in the business. He was an officer and 



75 

agent of the government of the United States. This act of the 
government also dispossessed him of his saw mills." 

And to the fourth interrogatory on the part of claimant, he 
says, (page 16.) 

" Mr. Sibbald was, as before stated, dispossessed of his lands 
and mills, by the officer and agent of the United States — Mr. 
William D. Acken ; he luas a special agent of the government, 
sent from Washington, and acted with Mr. Douglass, the Dis- 
trict Attorney. He stopped Mr. Samuel Grice from cutting live 
oak timber on the lands claimed by Mr, Sibbald, and forbid me 
from having pine timber cut to supply the saw mills. The peo- 
ple I sent on Mr. Sibbald' s lands to cut mill logs, vere driven 
from their loork by Mr. Acken, and he threatened me with an 
injunction, arrest and imprisonment — and to hnnfi, a. detachment 
of troops from St. Augustine, and to put me in the Fort — as I 
wrote Mr. Sibbald at the time." 

" He also seized the mill logs cut for the use of the niills, ana 
threw every possible obstacle in the way, until I was compelled 
to submit." 

We next will support this important testimony by the evi- 
dence of the engineer, Mr. Wm. Carlyle, of Philadelphia. 

WM. CARLYLE, engineer of the mills, says at p. 44, " He 
was deprived, all the time I was there, of cutting saw logs and 
live oak, and continued to be so when I left there. I was there, 
(at the mills,) about eighteen months, including one short ab- 
sence." [This includes the time of building the mills.] 

In quoting part of this testimony as relates to Mr. Carlyle 
being eighteen months at Panama, particular attention is called 
to the part relating to the astounding fact, that the claimant 
"was deprived, all the time he was there, of cutting his 'own 
saw logs and live oak.'' " 

The saw logs needed for the mills — and which alone induced 
the construction, and the live oak requisite for his ship building 
and shipments, as well as his contracts. 

JOHN RODMAN, Esq., Collector of Customs, says, at p. 
110, " Mr. Acken called upon me, and observed, that by his in- 
structions, he had always considered himself bound to prevent 
the cutting of any kind of timber on public lands, or the re- 
moval of it in any way ; and that land claimed by the possess- 
ors under Spanish grants, if those grants had not yet been con- 
firmed by our government, were comprised by our government 
in all public lands ; he also assured me. that Mr. Douglass, the 



76 

District Attotney for the United States here, had assured him 
that he (the District Attorney) had received instructions of the 
same nature and the same etFect, to prevent the cutting or re- 
moval of any timber, even pine, as well as live oak or red cedar, 
on any granted land, as well as any other public land, unless 
the grant had been confirmed by our government. I well re- 
member, in a conversation with Mr. Douglass on this subject, 
he declared he had received instructions to that effect ; that is, 
to prevent people from cutting any kind of timbei, not only on 
obvious public lands, but on any lands claimed from Spanish 
grants, if these grants had not yet been confirmed by our gov- 
ernment." 

" I understood Mr. Acken, that Mr. Douglass, the District 
Attorney of the United States, at St. Augustine, in virtue of his 
instructions from the government, (I do not now recollect from 
which Department,) had authorized him to make seizures of tim- 
ber cut, and to prevent the cutting of any more on land in Flo- 
rida, or be removed thence, though the land should even be 
claimed by the real grantees. I understood, that the said Mr. 
Acken acted under this authority from the said Mr. Douglass, 
by stopping the operation of Mr. Sibbald's saw mill on Trout 
creek, and by preventing him from cutting timber on his own 
land ; and that he, the said Mr. Acken, had previously done the 
same on the tract of 4000 acres at Mosquito, on his presumption 
of his authority, by his instructions from the government." (page 
150.( 

And Mr. Rodman notified the claimant on the 11th of Decem- 
ber, 1828, as follows: — "The District Attorney has given Mr. 
Acken his written opinion, that all grants for mills seats, until 
confirmed by the government, or decided by the judiciary as 
valid, are to be considered as public property of the United 
States." (See letter, page 21.) And on the 24th of February, 
1830, the claimant was again thus notified by the said Collector 
of Customs : " I am expressly directed by the Secretary of the 
Treasury, to seize on all timber cut upon these lands — the gov- 
ernment consider all lands in Florida, the claims for which have 
not been confirmed, as public lands." (page 23.) And on the 
claimant making an effort, in November, 1835, to get the use of 
his property, he was again notified by the Collector from " St. 
Augustine, on the 20th of November, 1835, with regard to your 
enquiry respecting the cutting of live oak timber, you cannot cut 
a stick of it on any of the lands which you claim, until the grant 
be finally confirmed in court. My orders on the subject from 
the Treasury Department are express, to stop and seize all tim- 
ber cut." &c. (Page 32.) 



77 

This testimony is fully confirmed by that of the District At- 
torney ; at page 178, Mr. Doughiss says, " By instructions re- 
ceived by him from George Graham, Esq., Commissioner of the 
General J -and Office, bearing date August 14th, 1828, a copy of 
which is herewith enclosed, it will appear that all lands claimed 
under Spanish grants then remaining unconfirmed, were con- 
sidered public lands, and to be treated accordingly." 

The evidence of the last two witnesses, the one Collector of 
the Customs, the other the District Attorney, are conceived to 
be liighly important. 

The next witness is John Gibson, Esq., now a merchant of 
Philadelphia. (See page 22.) He answers thus : 

All my knowledge on the subjects inquired about in this in- 
terrogatory is derived fi'om keeping the books of Mr. Sibbald, 
and seeing his correspondence. Mr. Sibbald was virtually de- 
prived of the use of his lands and mills in the year eighteen 
hundred and twenty-eight, twenty-nine, and thirty. I speak 
now of the four thousand and ten thoKjsand acre tracts. I mean 
he had no use of the timber during the first two years, and was 
also, in eighteen hundred and tliirty, deprived of the use of the 
mills. He was forbidden to cut timber from both said tracts, 
consisting of pine and live oak, by Wm. D. Acken, Esq., agent 
of the Navy Department, and Thomas Douglass, United States 
Attorney at St. Augustine, and John Rodman, Esq., Collector 
of the Customs at St. Augustine. I think I have spoken to Mr. 
Douglass about stopping Mr. Grice from taking live oak timber 
— 1 have had no conversation whatever on these subjects with 
Mr. Rodman or Mr. Acken. I know Mr. Rodman, but not Mr. 
Acken. The forbidding the cutting of timber was, as I heard, 
by Mr. Acken, personally, and not by letter. Mr. Rodman's 
letter I have seen, but I cannot tell the date. 1 never saw any 
letter on the subject from Mr. Douglass. 

The next witness is Lewis Fleming, Esq., a planter of East 
Florida, (taken from page 133.) Mr. Acken himself, it will be 
seen, told this witness " that he had stopped Mr. Snowden, the 
agent of Mr. Sibbald, from cutting pine timber on Mr. Sibbald's 
mill grants." This is direct testimony. (See his evidence.) 

To the fourth interrogatory, the witness answers that William 
D. Acken, Esq., agent of the United States for the preservation 
of timber in Florida, told this witness that he (Acken) had stop- 
ped Mr. Snowden, the agent of Mr. Sibbald, from cutting pine 
timber on Mr. Sibbald's mill grant ; witness thinks this was in 



78 

the year 1828 ; it is strongly impressed on his (witness's) mind 
from the circumstance that he wished to cut some timber from 
a tract of land which he (witness) then owned near the St. 
Mary's river, but Mr. Acken told him if he did so he (Acken) 
should seize the timber so cut, and said he had just stopped Mr. 
Snowden from cutting, as aforesaid ; witness does not know that 
the hands Mr. Sibbald engaged in cutting timber were driven 
from work, but he was of course prevented from using his tim- 
ber. Witness does not know the means resorted to by the agent 
of the United States to prevent Mr. Sibbald from cutting tim- 
ber, but he has no doubt that the agent did so prevent him, and 
that Mr. Sibbald was compelled to abandon his mill because he 
could not supply it with logs. 

SAMUEL GRIGE, Esq., of Philadelphia, Navy Contractor, 
page 29, says, — Third interrogatory. " Mr. Sibbald was dis- 
possessed of the live oak lands that I had been on myself; and 
I have no knowledge that he is possessed of them yet. This 
was done by the agent of the government of the United States, 
Mr. Wm. D. Acken." And page 32, fourth interrogatory, " I 
was told by Mr. Rodman, Collector, and Mr. Douglass, the Dis- 
trict Attorney, that we could not cut the timber on the lands, 
under pain of fine and imprisonment" 

Colonel John Warren, page 121. 

To the third interrogatory, the witness answers that he knows 
that Mr. Sibbald was prevented from cutting live oak and pine 
timber from his mill tract by Mr. Acken, a government agent. 

FARQUHAR BETHUNE, Esq., planter, p. 136, 3d inter- 
rogatory, and p.l39, 4th interrogatory, says, "To the acts of the 
government of the U. States, or the agents, is the destruction 
of Mr. Sibbald's mills to be attributed. The government of the 
United States instructed their agents to consider all mill grants 
as public property, and deprive their owners of the use and 
profits of them, until the Supreme Court of the United States 
decided in their favor," This is confirmed by the District At- 
torney, at page 178. 

WM. J. MILLS, assistant book-keeper at the mills, p. 142, 
3d interrogatory, says, " Mr. William D. Acken, repeatedly, in 
my presence, forbid the agents of Mr. Sibbald to cut lumber of 
any kind, from the lands owned by him ; as well as to forbid 
many settlers and owners of land in the vicinity, of cutting lum- 
ber to supply the mills ;" and the 4th interrogatory, he says, 



79 

" The agents of Mr. Sibbald were annoyed for more than a year 
before the stoppage. Thousands of logs were left to rot in the 
woods, by such interference." 

It will be seen hereafter that Thomas Stevens, the black- 
smith, corroborates that part of the testimony as to the logs de- 
caying in the woods, he says : " I know the logs were there. I 
saw them ten years afterwards. When I saw them in 1839, 
some of them were very much rotted, and some partly burnt, 
in consequence of the burning of the underwood." Also Mr. 
Mills, in his deposition, filed with the other papers, says " that 
in a conversation with Mr. D. Acken, Esq., formerly agent of 
the United States for the preservation of timber in Florida, the 
said Acken stated, that in preventing the cutting of pine timber 
on the land of Charles F. Sibbald, Esq., in Florida, for the use 
of the steam saw mills of the latter, on Trout Creek, in East 
Florida, in 1829, and during the time he held said office, he did 
no more than he was ordered or instructed to do by the United 
States, to prevent the cutting or use of timber from any lands 
to which the title of the claimant should not have been admitted 
by the government of the United States. Mr. Acken was suc- 
ceeded in office by Thompson Mason, Esq., who acted under 
similar instructions for several years, and the office is now held 
by Cornelius Tyler, Esq., acting as I am informed under similar 
instructions." 

This shows that there were agents successively appointed 
to enforce the prohibition, and we shall presently show the 
commission of Mr. Mason, appointed immediately after Mr. 
Acken's was revoked. 

DR. JAS. HALL, at p. 193, 3d interrogatory, says, " He 
was informed and believes that a quantity of pine timber, which 
had been cut on the tract on Trout Creek, was seized by Wil- 
liam D. Acken, Esq., an agent of the government of the United 
States." 

The said agent told this witness, that " he was instructed by 
the government to prevent the cutting of timber upon all the 
mill grants that had not been confirmed ; and to seize all timber 
which had been or might be cut on any such unconfirmed grant 
— the government considered them public lands, and treated 
them accordingly." 

This evidence supports that of Col. Mills,, that Mr. Acken 
said he " was instructed by the government to prevent the cut- 



80 

ting of timber upon all the mill grants that had not been con- 
firmed." 

MR. GEORGE COLT, the next witness, was principal book- 
keeper at the mills. This witness, as will be seen by his " refer- 
ences to the Merchants' Bank, N. York, and merchants of that 
city," together with the situation he held, and his opportunities 
of knowing all the facts, having been on the spot from April, 
1829, to July 1830, is one of great importance. 

x\t page 117 will be found his first evidence, taken by the 
Treasury Department, as follows: 

" Mr. Sibbald was deprived of the benefits of contracts with 
]Mr. Grice, of Philadelphia, by the interference on the part of 
the government agents with his property. And Mr. Sibbald 
also made extensive contracts with the Navy Department for 
live oak timber, which he was prevented from cutting. The 
contracts amounted to between three and four hundred thousand 
dollars. The amount of damages sustained by the non-fulfil- 
ment of these contracts I cannot correctly estimate, but believe 
that bonds are usually required for one-third of the amount." 

10. To the tenth interrogatory, witness saith: 
I know that the interference of the government in preventing 
Mr. Sibbald from cutting his timber, and dispossessing him of 
his lands, deprived him of most important pecuniary resources. 
The contracts with Mr. Grice would have given him ^16,000 
in cash. Mr. Joseph E. Bloomfield withdrew his loan of 
§15,000 in consequence, together with many other mercantile 
houses in New York, Boston, and Philadelphia, from which 
houses he was enjoying very extensive credits, all of which were 
predicated on his lands in Florida. He was further deprived 
of resources which he might have derived from 5000 acres of 
lands particularly adapted to the growth of sugar cane — and 
the abundant growth of the live oak timber upon them. These 
lands are valued at ten dollars the acre, independent of the live 
oak upon them. All these resources of profit and peculiar ad- 
vantages he was deprived of by the direct interference of the 
officers and agents of the government of the United States. I 
was familiar with Mr. Sibbald's business transactions from 1829 
to 1835. I know that Mr. Acken, the government agent, visited 
Mr. Sibbald's mills in person, and then forbid Mr. Sibbald's 
agent, Mr. C. Snovvden, from cutting any timber upon that 
•tract, and also forbid a person by the name of Price (who was 
then cutting for the consumption of Mr. Sibbald's mills) from 
cutting more, and if they persisted in cutting he would punish 



81 

them, or any other person that might attempt to cut timber 
upon that grant, to the fullest extent of the law. I believe Mr. 
Sibbald to have been induced to undertake that business in Flo- 
rida, exclusively looking to this property as the basis of his sup- 
port, and which was throughout treated as the public property 
of the United States, until the final confirmation of it to him, in 
February, 1836, by the Supreme Court. 

Mr. Colt, more recently, has given the following. His entire 
deposition is, with those that follow, very important — 

Mr. George Colt, book-keeper at the mills, in 1829 and 1830, 
recently, in answer to interrogatories, says, " The United 
States agent, Mr. William D. Acken, did come to the mills 
during my residence there, and interfere, interrupt, and stop 
his, said Sibbald's, business. The United States agent did go 
into the woods and drive the operatives from cutting the mill 
logs necessary to supply the saw mills. The United States 
agent did hold the agent and operatives of Mr. Sibbald in strong 
apprehension of personal danger, by threats of whipping the ne- 
groes, and of imprisoning the agent, Capt. Snowden, in the St. 
Augustine fort ; and that the United States troops should be 
brought upon the spot to see these threats enforced. There were 
serious and many altercations between the United States agent, 
and the agent of Mr. Sibbald, in resisting these encroachments 
upon the rights and property of Mr. Sibbald. The U. States 
agent did, previously, stop the cutting of live oak timber, which 
Mr. Sibbald was cutting to supply his navy contracts and ship 
building. There was more or less live oak timber upon the said 
Sibbald's tracts of land. I was present at the Panama steam 
saw mills when Mr. Acken, the government agent, forbid the 
cutting of any timber upon the grants of Mr. Sibbald, and when 
these said aggressions were made : I know that Mr. Sibbald has 
been in correspondence with the officers of the executive depart- 
ments at Washington ; and has remonstrated with them and 
resisted their encroachments upon his rights since he was first 
molested in his operations in Florida." 

" I know that letters were received by Mr. Sibbald's agent 
from Mr. Rodman, Collector of St, Augustine, directing him 
not to cut any more pine logs on Sibbald's grant. There we.e 
agents appointed by the government successively to enforce the 
prohibition on Mr. Sibbald. I recollect the names of Mr. Acken, 
Mr. Mason, and Major Taylor." 

Here we shall show the last successful eflfort of Mr. Acken in 

11 



82 

driving the claimant from the mill tract, by force and vio- 
lence, and actual threats of inflicting bodily injury. After 
the letter of Mr. Snowden of May 27, 1829, exhibiting his 
determination to maintain the rights and authority of the 
claimant over his property at the saw mills, he came to Phila- 
delphia himself, to report the facts, instead of writing. Mr. Colt 
says " Mr. Acken was at the mill several times in the month of 
June, and at one time particularly, he drove the negroes that 
were employed in cutting logs, from the woods, where they 
were at work, by threats of flogging ; in consequence of which, 
the negroes returned to the mills : and all further attempts to 
cut logs was abandoned, in consequence of the interference of 
the government agent. I think that was the final act of Mr. 
Acken, the government agent, at the mill. I can say, positive- 
ly, that it was the final act. Captain Snowden, the agent, left 
the mills about that time for Savannah, on his way to Philadel- 
phia. I recollect the government agent being at the mill, and 
communicating with the District Attorney, in St. Augustine, 
before this threat. I know the fact that he drove the negroes 
off. I do not know of there being any attempt to cut timber on 
Mr. Sibbald's lands after the negroes were driven from their 
work by the government agent. Mr. Acken some time in the 
month of June, I think, left the country for Washington. There 
was another agent (Mr. Mason, on the 16th June, 1829,) ap- 
pointed in the place of Mr. Acken, who, it was understood by 
all at the mills, would carry out the course taken by the former 
agent, which prevented any further attempt of cutting mill logs 
on Mr. Sibbald's grant. I know that all mill grants, not con- 
firmed by the government of the United States, were treated as 
public domain. Mr. Sibbald had no use of these lands for the 
purposes for which these grants were given ; that is, he was for- 
bidden, and could not cut the lumber from them. Mr. Sibbald 
had no use of the property. I know that there was an attempt, 
in several instances, from January to June, 1829, to prevent 
cutting mill logs and other timber. The people generally, in 
that neighbourhood, were stopped from cutting mill logs at that 
period. 

" There were no mill logs brought to the mill from January, 
1829, to July, 1829. I have to-day refreshed my memory by 
examining the account books kept by me at that time. There 
were no mill logs charged or credited within that period. There 
was another mill constructing at Panama. I know that Mr. 
Sibbald was daily expecting that the Mill Grants would be con- 
firmed by the Courts in Florida at that time. If the land title 
had been confirmed, Mr. Sibbald could have supplied himself from 



83 

these lands with mill logs and other timber. The mill was 
several times stopped in consequence of this interference. It 
sawed at intervals. That Mr. Sibbald's whole business was 
broken up there, I attribute to the interference of the govern- 
ment agents alone ; and had Mr. Sibbald have had the free use 
of those lands, he could have fully carried out his views in saw- 
ing lumber and cutting live oak. I consider, that Mr. Sibbald's 
business was wholly broken up, in consequence of the interfer- 
ences of the government agents there. Mr. Sibbald was forced 
to abandon the business until these land claims were confirmed. 
I was there until the final abandonment of the mills and other 
property." 

At this period, the course taken by the government agents 
caused a great excitement at the mill among those employed 
there, and also in the neighbourhood ; and from the determina- 
tion manifested by Mr. Acken, in stopping all further cutting, 
the agent, Captain Snowden, could not furnish himself with mill 
logs or other timber from the Mill Grant. Mr. Acken further 
threatened to imprison Captain Snowden, the agent of Mr. Sib- 
bald, if he attempted to cut more mill logs. Mr. Acken further 
threatened to bring the United States troops from St. Augus- 
tine, to enforce these threats. 

" I know also, that the United States marine and United States 
troops loere s^ihject to the order of the government agents. It 
was a prohibition, and enforced by driving the negroes from the 
woods, and preventing all further cutting of timber. I know 
that Mr. Sibbald addressed several letters to the various heads 
of the several departments at Washington, asking their autho- 
rity to prevent his being further molested in his operations in 
Florida by the government agents ; these applications were not 
effectual." 

Now Mr. Snowden's letter of the 27th May, 1829, exhibits 
that Mr. Acken told the Collector of the Customs at that period, 
that he was determined to stop him from cutting the timber to 
supply the saw mills ; and Mr. Acken himself, testifies, that he 
was upon the ground, and at the mills " on the 20th of June, 
1829," and the result is manifest. 

The following witnesses support Mr. Snowden's testimony, 
and Mr. Colt's, with the others, of the fact, that Mr. Acken ac- 
tually laid violent hands upon the operatives, and eventually 
drove them from the forests of the claimant, where they were 
cutting the mill logs for his own mills, upon his own lands, in 
June, 1829, and these mechanics were writing to their families 
in Philadelphia constantly. Mr. Rice says, Mr. Sully superin- 



84 

tended the gang placed at Six Mile creek, near Watson's, as 
oidered by the letter to Mr. Snowden, which Mr. Stephens also 
confirms, were stopped. This must have been one of the first 
acts of Mr. Acken. 

James Rice, a mill-wright, who assisted tr ; aid the mill 
erected in 1829, has recently given the folloviiig testimony: — 
" That he is a mill-wright, and was employed in the capacity of 
a mill-wright at the steam saw mill erected by Charles F. Sib- 
bald, merchant, of the city of Philadelphia, on said Sibbald's 
land in Florida, in the year one thousand eight hundred and 
twenty-nine. That the land on which said saw mills were erect- 
ed, was said, at the time, to belong to Mr. Sibbald ; a tract of 
sixteen thousand acres, well timbered with pine and live oak, 
suitable for building vessels. 

" That he, the deponent, knows, of the operatives of the said 
Sibbald being driven off, and prevented from cutting pine tim 
ber on his, the said Sibbald's lands, by an agent of the United 
States by the name of Acken; and that said Acken quarrelled 
with the agents of Sibbald ; that the black labourers of Mr. Sib- 
bald came in from the woods where they had been cutting pine 
logs, saying that Acken, the agent of the United States had 
driven them from the woods, by threatening to inflict personal in- 
jury, by whipping them ; that the deponent does not know whe- 
ther they (the blacks) were prevented from cutting the live oak 
or not ; that Charles Snowden was the agent of Mr. Sibbald at 
these mills ; that he knows that Mr. Chester Sully was also en- 
gaged in cutting mill logs on Mr. Sibbald's land; that his en- 
campment was on what is called Six Mile creek, and that Mr. 
Acken told this deponent that he had driven the said Sully away, 
and prevented him from cutting timber on the premises of the 
said Sibbald, and caused the hands employed to leave, but where 
they went, this deponent does not know; that this deponent 
does knoio the fact of these hands leaving, and recollects the 
time, from Mr. Sully's taking a quantity of rope and some 
blocks," &c. 

Thomas Stephens, of the city of Philadelphia, then employed 
as blacksmith at the mills, has also recently given the following 
testimony: "I engaged with Mr. Charles F. Sibbald, in Decem- 
ber, 1828, to work as blacksmith in erecting a steam saw mill 
and other smith work in that way, at Panama, in East Florida. 
Mr. Sibbald asked me if I understood ship work, as well as mill 
work, and mentioned his intention of building shipping, and that 
I would be called on to work at ship smith work as well as mill 



8^ 

smith work. After I had been there, I found that there was 
pine timber as well as live oak, &c. To the best of my recol- 
lection, the saw mill could run twenty saws. I think it did not 
require less than forty logs a day to keep the mill in operation. 

"I know of an agent of the United States coming on Mr. Sib- 
bald's property, and forbidding the labourers to cut any more 
timber. I know that he forbid them cutting any more timber, 
and if they did not leave directly, he would tie the negroes up 
and whip them; and they came to report these circumstances to 
the agent, Captain Charles Snowden. Mr. Chester Sully was 
the man who directed the negroes in their work in cutting on 
Six Mile creek at the time, on Mr. Sibbald's lands. The spot 
where Mr. Sully was cutting I have marked with the letter B, 
and indicated by an ink line on the map hereunto annexed." 

*' I understood, that all the lands on that side of the creek be- 
longed to Mr. Sibbald, and as shown by the draft annexed. 
When the report was brought down that the agent had stopped 
them from cutting, Mr. Sully went to bring the logs down that 
were cut, he was forbid to touch any of them. I know the logs 
were there, and I saw some ten years afterv^^ards, in 1839, when 
I was there. When I saw them in 1839, some of them were 
very much rotted, and some partly burnt, in consequence of the 
burning of the underwood. The men employed at the works 
talked about this matter a good deal, and thought it hard that 
Mr. Sibbald should suffer such loss ; and we expected that it 
being done in this high way, it would stop Mr. Sibbald's busi- 
ness. Every person seemed anxious on behalf of Mr. Sibbald, 
knowing that the land was Mr. Sibbald's, and thinking that he 
ought to use his own property as he thought proper. The la- 
bourers that came in uere so terrified, that they would not dare 
to lift another axe!" 

Mr. Mills (at page 142) confirms this; he says, thousands of 
logs were left to rot in the woods, by such interference. 

Mr. Rice also, (at page 107,) in a former deposition, taken by 
the District Attorney of the United States at Philadelphia, says: 
— "In the forepart of February, 1829 ; a derrick pole had bee 
cut, and I, Mr. Carlyle, Mr. Garns, Mr. Donnelly, and some 
black men, were bringing it to the mills, when we were met by 
Mr. Acken, and he said he had caught us, and should have to 
report us to the government, &c. This pole was cut about a 
quarter of a mile of the mills, and in the lines of the Mill Grant, 
&c. It was of yellow pine. 

So it is thus seen, that as early as February, Mr. Acken com- 
menced his interference. 



86 

It is deemed unnecessary to extend the testimony upon this 
subject, and we will merely show, that in June, 1829, the claim- 
ant wrote Judge Berrien, then Attorney General of the United 
States as follows. 

This letter is taken from his letter book. 

Letter Book B, page 117. 

Philadelphia, June 13th, 1829. 

" My agent in Florida writes me per last mail, that my steam 
saw would go into operation by the 12th instant, but the agent 
of the government of the United States is placing every possi- 
ble obstacle in my way — that he has forbid his cutting pine 
timber (to supply my saw mills) on my survey held for thirteen 
years — he has threatened him with imprisonment, and to bring 
a detachment of United States troops from St. Augustine to take 
possession of my property ; after permitting persons to cut large 
quantities of timber on other grants for me, when on the point 
of removing it, he has prevented them ; thus after expending up- 
wards of forty thousand dollars, 1 find an obstacle placed in my 
way, which, if not removed very speedily, is calculated to in- 
jure me in the most serious manner. That the government of 
the United States will sanction such a violation of our rights, I 
cannot believe, as the treaty declares that private property shall 
be respected in the ceded territory. 

Will you be pleased to advise me how to proceed, or to re- 
present the matter at Washington, that the agent may be in- 
structed to desist. I assure you I have by these means, since 
October last, been deprived of seven or eight thousand dollars, 
which I should have received from my live oak contract with 
Mr. Grice, and could now establish heavy damages against the 
agents (and government.) 

My agent also informs me, that the whole of the timber cut 
by other persons for me, was cut upon lands covered by a legal 
Spanish title, although the title may not have been yet con- 
firmed." 

Judge Berrien, before receiving the appointment of Attorney 
General, in 1820, had agreed to act in the Supreme Court in the 
land case of the claimant, but, nevertheless, wrote to him sub- 
stantially thus : that although this was a matter connected with 
those lands, it was a subject, in which he did not feel at liberty 
then to interfere. 

The following will show, that the government positively re- 
fused to modify the general instructions, so as to sanction the 
pine timber for the use of the saw mills after the acts of Mr. 



87 

Acken were performed, and he succeeded by Mr. Thomas Ma- 
son. 

Copy of a letter to Hon. S. D. Ingram, Secretary of the Trea- 
sury. 

General Land Office, ) 

May 29, 1829. \ 

Sir, — I enclose you a letter from Mr. Ringgold, the District- 
Attorney for Middle Florida, urging a relaxation of the general 
instructions relative to the depredations on the public timber, 
so as to sanction the taking of pine timber, for the use of saw 
mills, or for the purpose of supplying neighbouring settlements, 
towns, &c. 

I enclose you such parts of the correspondence with the Dis- 
trict-Attorneys of Florida, as will enable you to decide as to the 
expediency of any further modification of the general instruc- 
tions other than those referred to in my letters to Mr. White 
and Mr. Wright, No. 9 and 12, which refer to cases where the 
property is taken for public uses, and where the benefit inures 
to the public. 

It may be proper to add, that the great mass of depredations 
committed on the public timber, arises from taking logs for saw 
mills, and bark for tanneries. The pine timber of Florida is 
considered better and more durable for all those uses to which 
that description of timber is applied, than any other pine of the 
growth of the United States. 

I am, &c., 

Signed, GEO. GRAHAM, Com'r. 

To THE Hon. S. D. Ingham, 

Secretary of the Treasury. 



Treasury Department, July 11th, 1829. 
Sir, — In answer to your letter enclosing one from Mr. J. G. 
Ringgold, and your correspondence with the District-Attorneys 
of Florida, I would observe, tfe^at no sufficient reason is perceived 
for a further modification of the general instructions relative to 
the preservation of the public timber in Florida. 

I am very, &c., 

Signed, S. D. INGHAM. 

To Geo. Graham, Esq., ) 
Com'r General Land Office. ) 



88 

Comment would be useless upon facts like these. We have 
now exhibited that the claimant was a merchant in Philadel- 
phia, in the peaceable enjoyment of a large and very valuable 
landed estate in Florida, exclusively induced by which he en- 
tered into a most extensive business arrangement, building 
mills, making contracts for live oak and other timber ; that he 
invested an immense sum of money, entirely relying upon the 
continual use and enjoyment of his property, to obtain his means 
of supporting his business, and to sustain his mercantile credit ; 
that the government swept his whole estate from under him, 
and from his use, absolutely drove and forced him to abandon 
his own property. That the interference of the government, 
through their agents, cut off his means from his timber, from 
his lands, and from his mills — and thus laying the axe at the 
very root of his undertaking — and that while he was pursuing 
the lawful exercise of his rights, he was overwhelmed in diffi- 
culty and ruin, clearly and positively by orders emanating from 
this government, by agents commissioned by the government, 
that made known their proceedings to it, and to whom the claim- 
ant appealed loud and often for relief, and that his appeals were 
totally disregarded. 

That not only is the ''interference" such as is contemplated in 
the bill passed for his relief, turning all the consequences of 
these acts upon the United States, but that even a degree of 
violence, or force, has been used, that would be ample in consti- 
tuting a legal claim against the government. 

First. In the the violation of the treaty existing with Spain, 
and thus also violating a contract. 

Secondly. In the violation of the Constitution, and the obli- 
gations that exist in the government to protect the citizen in 
his property, and the exercise of his rights, and the enjoyment 
of that property. 

Thirdly. In the actual threats made by the agents of the U. 
States, of imprisoning the agents of the claimant ; in driving his 
labourers from his forests, under the menace of bodily injury of 
" whipping," and the actual seizure of his mill logs, and the 
threats of seizing his vessels, and the apprehension of their con- 
fiscation, from the facts as exhibited in the case of the brig 
Planter. 

We now proceed to introduce the next agent of the govern- 
ment, for the purpose of exhibiting that immediately after Mr. 
Acken was withdrawn from Florida, another officer was ap- 
pointed in his stead. The extract of his commission here fol- 
lows: 



89 

Navy Department, June 16th, 1829. 

Thompson Mason, Esq. — "You are hereby appointed an agent 
for the preservation of timber in Florida. Should you discover 
any persons cutting timber on the lands of the United States, or 
carrying it away after having been so cut, or preparing to carry 
away such timber, you will please to order them to desist, and 
if necessary, request the aid of the civil authorities, o/' officers of 
the United States Army or Navy to prevent the commission of 
any tresspass. 

" In all doubtful cases you will refer to the District Attorney, 
and follow his advice."" 

Navy Department, March 16th, 1830. 

[Extract.] 
" In case where doubts shall exist, as to the manner of per- 
forming yjur duty, consult the District Attorney of the United 
States, and act in accordance with his advice." 

And it would seem that in 1832, Lieut. Gedny was sent to 
Florida with " Marine Guards," to protect the timber of that 
territory. 

It is thus seen that agents were successively appointed by the 
department at Washington, that those agents continued to re- 
ceive instructions to call upon the military and naval powers to 
enforce their authority. Also that they were ordered " to call 
upon the District Attorney for advice," as to the manner of per- 
forming their duty, and to act in accordance with that authori- 
ty given by the District Attorney. 

Thus far we have exhibited the first interference and interdic- 
tion with regard to the live oak contracts ; its effects on the ship 
building and the general business affairs of the claimant, and 
also the interference, disturbance, consternation and confusion 
of the claimants affairs at his saw mill establishment, by the 
violent measures adopted to drive him to abandon his pine lum- 
ber, and his property, and the fact of the appointment of an- 
other agent in June, 1829, to enforce the prohibition. 

We will next show the renewed interference with Mr. Grice, 
ending in the loss of the contract, and the failure of the whole 
business, and the destruction of the mills, and the abandonment 
of the property. 

Mr. Grice, in the autumn of 1829, made another attempt to 
get the live oak ; his following letter will show the abundance 
of the timber, and its excellent quality. They were written 
from the spot by Mr. Samuel Grice, who had gone on the land 
with a large force of carpenters and others, to cut the timber. 

\2 



90 

New Smyrna, January 1830. 

" I wrote Captain Snowden on the 14th of last month, re- 
questing him (as we had agreed) to come lo this place to pre- 
sent himself as your agent, and defend me against any conflict- 
ing claim, so that I may obtain the live oak if practicable, jor 
again I have been told by the United States authorities at St. 
Augustine, ' that any attempt to cut the timber will be resisted 
and arrested.' It is necessary to put me in peaceable posses- 
sion as early as practicable — you will see the necessity of de- 
cision in this case. If you think that Captain Snowden will not 
attend to any communication from me, please to write him with- 
out delay." 

Again, — 

New Smyrna, E. F. Feb. 20th, 1830. 

" Yours of the 4th was received last week, since which Mr. 
Mills (acting for Captain Snowden) has been here, and yester- 
day went out together to the tract you claim in Turnbull's 
Swamp ; nearly all my men are now there at work. It is much 
to be regretted that you neglected to give instructions to Cap- 
tain Snowden as per our understanding. When I left Philadel- 
phia, I wrote to request his attendance in December, as I heard 
from good authority that we s'lould be forbidden to cut on the 
tracts. A letter received from Captain Snowden fifteen days 
ago, informed me he would be here in a few days, calculating 
on which I sent oif men iusi week to commence cutting, conclu- 
ding he would arrive in time to put me in quiet possession, and 
defend us therein if required. To be prevented from cutting 
and taking away the timber after we have erected our houses on 
the premises, — have our men, teams, SfC, in active employment, 
would be an enormous sacrifice, indepeiident of its disabling me 
from performing my contract with the Government, and for 
which I am under heavy bonds. I trust, however. Captain 
Snowden. after seeing Mr. Mills, may be aware of the impor- 
tance of this subject, and give it immediate attention. The land 
on the tract is excellent, and well adapted to sugar culture. 
You would lose a handsome property if you should eventually 
fail in establishing your title. I hope it may be valid. The 
live oak on it looks well so far. We fell yesterday about fifty 
trees, generally sound. 1 hope sincerely, sir, that you may be 
enabled to establish your claim, as this property is certainly 
valuable." 

It will be recollected that Mr. Grice subsequently gave his 
testimony, to prove that he could " have cut .f 16,000 worth, or 
the 100,000 cubical feet, as per contract," which, he says, would 



9! 

♦' all have been profit to the claimant," as he was not to be at 
the expense of a cent. 

L. B.— folio 317. 

Extract of a letter from the same to Jolin Rodman, Esq., 
Counsellor at Law, St. Augustine. 

Philadelphia, February 1st, 1830. 

A few days ago I had a letter from Samuel Grice, Esq., at 
Mosquito, desiring I would send my agent to put him in peace- 
able possession of my tract there, (again,) that he might proceed 
to execute his contract entered into with me for live oak. He 
says the government authorities at St. Augustine still threaten 
him. I should like some immediate step taken against the per- 
son who shall attempt thus to infringe on my rights. My con- 
tract with Mr. Grice is a considerable one, and you will please 
take any measures necessary, if he is interfered with, by hold- 
ing the parties to bail, if practicable, in the sum of 
dollars, as I can establish damages. If there is any delicacy in 
your acting in this case against the agents of the government, 
you will be pleased to depute some one to act for me. 

This exhibits, conclusively, that from 1828 there was a con- 
stant interference with the claimant's property. 

Extract of a letter from John Rodman, Esq., Collector of the 
Customs at St. Augustine, and counsellor at law. 

St. Augustine, February 24th, 1830. 

Dear Sir, — I have received your letter of the 1st instant by 
the last mail. 

With respect to a suit against the agent of the United States, 
or any other officer, for interrupting Mr. Grice, or any other 
person authorized by you to cut timber on the tract of land 
claimed by you at Mosquito, I am sorry that my official situa- 
tion with the government, in relation to these land claims, pre- 
vents me from taking any part against the United States, for 
alleged trespasses committed by their officers, as I am expressly 
directed hy the Secretary of the Treasury to seize on all timber 
cut upon these lands. The irovernment consider a I lands in 
Florida, the claims for lohich have not been confirmed, as public 
lands. 

Before you direct any suit against the officers of the United 
States, for preventing you from cutting timber on this land, I 



92 

advise yoit to reflect upon the risk you run, and to consult some 
intelligent lawyer at Philadelphia on the subject. For which 
purpose I refer you to the act of Congress of the 3d of March, 
1807, to prevent settlement being made on lands ceded to the 
United States, until authorized by law; also, the act of the 1st 
of March, 1817, making reservation of certain public lands, to 
supply timber for naval purposes. 

By the first of these acts the lani is declared to be forfeited to 
the tlnited States, if any settleynent, or any thing else he done on 
it, before the claim be confirmed, and by the seccnd the person 
cutting any timber on the land, is liable to a penalty of S500, 
and 6 months irnprisonment, and the timber and vessel on board 
of which is laden, may be seized and forfeited. 

Under these circumstances, I conceive it to be extremely 
hazardous for you, and also for Mr. Grice, to proceed in the 
cutting of timber on this land. If, however, you should decide 
upon any legal proceeding against the United States officers, I 
recommend you to employ Mr. , an attorney and coun- 
sellor of this place, in the business. 

Note. — Mr. Rodman, being Collector of the Customs of St. 
Augustine, as well as my attorney at law there, felt a delicacy 
in acting against the authorities of the Government of the U. 
States. (See opinion of George M. Dallas, Esq., obtained at 
that time.) 

These are the laws directed to be applied, and which were 
applied to the claimant's property in Florida, by the Depart- 
ments at Washington, in the orders issued to the Collector of 
the Customs at St. Augustine, and also to Mr. Douglass, the 
District-Attorney, taking their authority from the act of Con- 
gress of February, 1822. 

The following legal opinions, to show the Secretary of the 
Treasury the basis of the claimant's rights, and asking him to 
protect him, were forwarded, with the letter, which will pre- 
sently follow, but which were totally disregarded, as will be 
seen. 



93 



OPINION OF GEORGE M. DALLAS, ESQ., 

AS TRANSMITTED TO THE SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY, 
BY THE CLAIMANT, IN MARCH, 1830. 

Philadelphia, March 22d, 1830. 

Sir, — I have examined your papers, and while I regret the 
necessity of hastening an opinion on their contents, feel much 
confidence in the impressions communicated. 

The United States, agreeably to the 8th article of the Florida 
Treaty, are bound to ratify and confirm any grant of land made 
before the 24th January, 1818, by the King of Spain, or any 
lawful authority from him in that territory, to the person in pos- 
session of the land. 

Have you such a grant, and are you in possession of the 
land? 

Your grant is dated, according to the translated copy exhi- 
bited to me, on the 2d of August, 1816, and it is made by 
" Coppinger," the Governor of East Florida. Three surveys 
have been made by your directions and for your use, under this 
grant, embracing in all sixteen thousand acres : you have in ad- 
dition fulfilled the object and complied with the terms of the 
grant, by erecting saw mills and carrying them into active ope- 
ration. 

Your possession under the grant has never been discontinued 
nor interrupted by any adversary claim or pretension. 

There does not then appear any reasons why your grants 
should not be " ratified and confirmed by the United States, if 
Governor Coppinger possessed lawful authority" from the King 
of Spain to make it. I should exceedingly doubt the necessity 
of your producing any evidence of this authority other than 
what is contained in the grant itself, as a genuine official docu- 
ment. To call for such evidence is in effect to call for Coppin- 
ger's commission or instructions from his Sovereign, a call that 
can never be answered. 

It is possible, however, by recurring to the laws, and legal 
forms respecting the creation and transferring of land titles in 
East Florida, while under the Spanish dominion, to show the 
general extent of a Governor's power therein. And I think suf- 
ficient is discernible in the collection made by Joseph M. 
White, Esq., printed by order of the House of Representatives, 
in 1829, to show that such grants of land as yours, for the pur- 
pose to which yours was designed, were within the lawful au- 



94 

thority conferred by the Spanish monarch upon the Governor of 

East Florida. 

Are you to be deemed and to act in reference to the lands as 
a mere stranger or intruder ? The inquiry arises from the fact 
that they are regarded as public lands, and that you are prohi- 
bited treating them as your property. After obtaining the ces- 
sion of the Floridas, the United States adopted measures to 
separate the private from the public property : to know with 
certainty what lands belonged to the nation, and what, upon 
the condition of the purchase, still belonged to individuals. 
They did not abruptly and violently assume the whole, and ex- 
act from every claimant proof that he was entitled to a part 
before they would give it back to him ; on the contrary, actua- 
ted by a wise attention to the political interest of peace and 
population, they disturbed nobody in his possession, and those 
claims only became subjects of difficulty which embraced a 
larger quantity of land than was covered by a single grant, 
which wanted the support ot actual occupancy, or which were 
presumed to have originated subsequent to, and in fraud of the 
treaty. The ratifications of the treaty were exchanged in Feb- 
ruary, 1821, and in May, 1822, Congress passed the act for 
ascertaining claims and titles to land in the territory of Florida, 
constituting for that purpose a Board of three Commissioners ; 
several other acts were subsequently devised and carried into 
operation. All claimants by patent grants, concession, or order 
of survey, dated previous to the 24th of January, 1818, were 
required to file their respective claims before these Commission- 
ers, who, however, were prohibited from confirming any claim 
in favour of any actual settler at the time of the cession of the 
territory to the United States, if the quantity claimed exceeded 
3,500 acres. By these proceedings, the United States justly 
legislate in such a manner as to continue, if not to guarantee in 
every settler and claimant the full enjoyment of the position he 
actually held at the ratification of the treaty, until his posses- 
sion should be divested by due course of law. 

I understand you to have conformed to the requisitions of the 
acts of Congress as far as they were applicable to your claim ; 
to have filed it with the Commissioners ; to have exhibited the 
evidence upon which it is founded, and not to have obtained 
their confirmation of it only because the quantity claimed ex- 
ceeded the limits of their jurisdiction. Their opinions, so far as 
expressed, were in favour of its allowance. It was not till the 
spring of 1828 that Congress legislated with a view to carry to 
final adjustment those claims which exceeded in their extent 



95 

3,500 acres. They then referred them to " be received and ad- 
judged" by the Superior Court of the District, upon petition 
filed by the claimants ; you have conformed to the directions of 
that statute, and your claim is now regularly waiting judicial 
scrutiny and determination. While such is the state of things, 
it is impossible to imagine, without assailing the justice and 
faith of the government, that your rights will be atfected by any 
act or order to which your assent is not given ; until the Court 
to which the United States have themselves turned you, shall 
condemn your title, they will respect your possession, and leave 
you to its entire enjoyment. It is said, however, that the offi- 
cers of government apply to your case the provisions of the act 
of Congress of 3d of March, 1807, entitled an act to prevent 
settlement being made on lands ceded to the United States, un- 
til authorized by law ; and those of the act of the 1st of March, 
1817, entitled "An act making reservation of certain Public 
Lands to supply timber for Naval purposes." By the first sec- 
tion of the first act, they deem themselves authorized to regard 
(the four thousand acres) as Public Lands, and by the second 
and third sections of the second act they propose to institute a 
criminal prosecution against those who cut the timber, and to 
enforce the forfeiture therein mentioned. 

This pretension is, in my opinion, equally unfounded and un- 
just. The Acts of Congress of 1607 and 1817, apply only to 
lands which had theretofore been ceded to the United States ; 
their titles are decidedly of that import, and at any rate, their 
provisions cannot be perverted to nullify possessions and settle- 
ment, which took effect before the Act could have any operation 
whatever over the ceded territory. This, indeed, is the princi- 
ple contained in the proviso to the first section of the first act, 
harmonizing with the views I have already taken on this head. 
It is thus provided, that nothing herein contained, shall be con- 
strued to affect the right, title, or claim of any person to lands 
in the territories of Orleans or Louisiana, before the Board of 
Commissioners established by the Act, &c. shall have made 
their report; and the decision of Congress been had thereon. 
Such a proviso is implied in the course Congress has taken on 
the adjustment of land titles in Florida; bare palpable justice 
will imply it, without a word to promise it ; and until the Court 
designated in the Act of 1828, shall have decided against you, 
your rights ought not to be impeded in their exercise, under co- 
lour of any law whatever, much less a law which had no effi- 
cacy in Florida, (if it ever had any,) until your rights became 
fixed and vested. To consider the lands as public lands, under 
the Acts of 1807 and 1817, is to prejudge the very question, to 



96 

determine which, the Act of 1828 referred you to a judicial tri- 
bunal. 

Entertaining these impressions, I am of opinion, that your 
best course in the present emergency is as follows : 

1st. Apply to the proper executive officer at Washington, to 
obtain instructions to the Register and Receiver in East Flori- 
da, not to interfere with your enjoyment of the lands, cutting 
timber, &c., until the Court shall have finally decided against 
your claim. 

2d. If such instructions cannot be obtained, and the Register 
and Receiver shall threaten any interference with yourself, or 
your authorized agent, in the enjoyment of these lands, cutting 
timber, &:c., give him formal notice that you will repel his inter- 
ference, will submit only to force, and will hold him responsible 
for whatever damages to yourself or agent may be the conse- 
quence of his acts. 

I am, sir, respectfully, your obedient servant, 
[Signed] GEORGE M. DALLAS. 

Charles F. Sibbald, Esq. 

No instructions whatever could be obtained ; the interference 
the claimant had endeavoured to repel, as has been shown, and 
now " looks to the United Slates for all the damages the conse- 
quence of these acts," as notified the Secretary of the Treasury 
at that day. 

OPINION OF SAMUEL CHEW, ESQ., 

Also transmitted to the Secretary of the Treasury. 

My opinion is requested on the rights involved in the follow- 
ing case : 

On the 16th June, 1816, Mr. Charles F. Sibbald, then a resi- 
dent of East Florida, made application to General Coppinger, 
- Governor of the Territory under the crown of Spain, for a grant 
of five miles square of land, for the construction of a saw mill, 
thereby securing important advantages to the trade of the Pro- 
vince, besides remunerating the applicant for his funds and la- 
bour, and if sufficient quantity should not be found at the loca- 
tion proposed, the equivalent to be made up elsewhere. 

2. On the 2d of August, 1816, a grant was made of the quan- 
tity, according to the petition, on condition that it should be of 
no avail until the mill should be settled, — and enjoining that, 
the proper certificate should be issued. 

3. On the 2d of May, 1819, a survey was returned by George 
I. F Clarke, Surveyor General of Florida, of 10,000 acres un- 
der said grant. 



97 

4. On the 8th of February, 1820, a survey was returned by 
the same of 4000 acres in Turnbull's Swamp, to complete in part 
the quantity so granted. 

5. On the 20th of February, 1820, a return of survey was 
made by the same of 2000 acres in Bowley's Hammock, to com- 
plete the said grant. 

6. The purposes and condition of the said grant have been 
fulfilled by the disbursement of more than ^70,000 by Mr. Sib- 
bald, in the erecting of mills and improvements on the lands, or 
part of them. 

These facts wr re submitted to me on a former occasion, when 
I declared my oj-inion, that by the 8th article of the Treaty 
with Spain, ratified on the 22d of February, 1821, these lands 
were secured in full title to Mr. Sibbald, in which opinion I am 
confirmed by subsequent consideration. 

2. But Mr. Sibbald's right to cut and vend the timber from 
the 4000 acres in Turnbull's Swamp, I understand to be denied 
by the officer of the United States, near the river tit. Johns ; 
and the Acts of 3d of March, 1807, entitled " An Act to prevent 
settlements from being made on lands ceded to the United 
States, until authorized by law," and the 1st of March, 1817, 
entitled " An Act to reserve certain public lands to supply tim- 
ber for naval purposes," are considered as applicable to this last 
named body of land. It is impossible to support a construction 
of these acts which will impair the rights of Mr. Sibbald to the 
4000 acres in question. 

1. All existing rights are recognized by the Treaty, and by 
the subsequent acts of Congress designating the mode by which 
such rights shall be ultimately ascertained and secured, and un- 
til the view first above expressed shall be refuted, and the lands 
become public lands, that is, the property of the United States, 
to be disposed of to any purchaser, they cannot be embraced 
within the letter or spirit of these statues. 

2. The provirions of these acts manifestly refer to public 
lands then ceded to the United States, and not prospectively to 
lands to be ceded, and for which, when obtained, proper legis- 
lative enactments would be made, but to which (as in the case 
of the Florida grants) it was impossible that the provisions of 
the acts relied on, could be applicable, or convenient, or just, 
without great modification. 

3. As the titles to nearly all the lands in Florida are directed 
to pass in review before tribunals constituted for the purpose, 
the Superior Court of the District, having cognizance of those 
exceeding 3500 acres, it would amount to an entire suspension 
of all enterprise, and restriction of all private property in Flo- 

13 



98 

rida, until the result of protracted judicial proceedings, always 
tardy, if the construction which 1 have given to these statues 
should not prevail. 

I concur with Mr. Dallas, in recommending that representa- 
tion be made to the Treasury Department at Washington, espe- 
cially as the interference of the c;fficer at St. Johns river to 
prevent the removal of the timber from the 4000 acre tract, 
must defeat one of the contracts for supplying live oak frames 
to the Navy Department, and calls for promjH relief. And I 
am also of opinion, that the interruption, of which notice has 
been given, will be illegal, and formal notice should be served 
upon (he officer, that he will be held liable for the very grievous 
consequences that will ensue. S. CllEW. 

26lh March, 1830. 

(L. B.— folio 346.) 

Copy of a letter to the Honourable S. D. Ingham, Secretary of 
the Treasury of the United States, dated 

Philadelphia, March 25th, 1830. 

Sir, — Having contracted with Mr. Grice, of this city, for the 
sale of a quantity of live oak from my lands in Florida, for the 
use of the United States, and for the object of complying with 
his obligation to the government, he has been interrupted in cut- 
ting the timber by the officer of the United States, under the 
idea, that the land granted to me in 1816, by the Spanish au- 
thority, could be affected by the Acts of the 3d May, 1807, and 
of the 1st May, 1817, as the preventing Mr. Grice from comply- 
ing with his contract with the United States, after his encoun- 
tering great expenses in sending a large number of workmen, 
and in preparation for cutting and shipping the live oak, must 
at the same time involve me in enormous and irremediable loss, 
— I hastened to lay my papers before Mr. G. M. Dallas and Mr. 
S. Chew, for their professional advice, and beg leave to enclose 
their opinions for your notice, and as fully explaining the views 
on which my rights depend. 

If, as I presume, you find those views conclusive, I pray you 
to send to me the necessary instructions to be transmitted to 
the United States officer in East Florida, early enough to pre- 
vent the infinite injury, loss, and injustice that must ensue to 
Mr. Grice and myself, from stopping the progress of the cutting 
the wood. 

I am, sir, very respectfully. 

Your obedient servant, 

CHARLES F. SIBBALD. 



99 

No anwser beinf received, after waiting, the following was 
next written by the claimant. 

(L. B.— folio 350.) 

Philadelphia, April 3d, 1830. 
Sir, — I had the honour, under date of the 26th ult., of address- 
ing you on a subject of deep interest to me, and in reference to 
which, I enclosed the professional opinions of Mr, G. M. Dallas 
and Mr. Chew of this city ; not having been favoured with a 
reply to my communication, the object of the present, is to beg 
that you will have the goodness to give it your attention as 
early as you conveniently can, in order that /m/'/?/ communicate 
with, and instruct my agent in Florida, at the earliest possible 
period, accordingly. 

I am, sir, very respectfully, 

Your obedient servant, 

CHARLES F. SIBBALD. 
To Hon. S. D. Ingham, 

Secretary of the Treasury, Washington. 

Treasuuv Department, 6th April, 1830. 
Sir, — In answer to your letter of the 3d inst., I have to inform 
you, that your communication of the 26th ult. was referred to 
the Navy Department, which is charged with the care and pre- 
servation of live oak and red cedar timber in Florida. 

I am respectfully, your obedient servant, 
S. D. INGHAM, 

Secretary of the Treasury. 
Charles F. Sibbald, Esq., Philadelphia, 

The claimant next addressed the Navy Department, which 
totally disregarded his communication, and left him waiting from 
day to day, to communicate the result to his agent in Florida ; 
and as the government evinced this firm determination to ad- 
here to its measures, the claimant was forced to abandon his 
property, mills and every thing. 

Philadelphia, April 13th, 1830. 
Sir, — I had the honour of addressing the Treasury Depart- 
ment of the United States on the 29th ult., enclosino^ the profes- 
sional opinions of two gentl-men of the bar in relation to a sub- 
ject of deep interest to me, and am informed by that Depart- 
ment, that the subj'^ct of my coinmunication was referred to 
you, as having charge of the preservation of live oak and cedar 
timber in Florida. I have to request, that you will please to 



^Qf£.' 



100 

inform me, whether the agents of the gove*ment have been in- 
structed to desist from their proceedings against my property in 
Florida, or otherwise ; hoping that you may be impressed, how 
important the subject of my communication is to me as an indi- 
vidual, and of the consequences that may result to the parties 
acting by my authority. 

I am, Sir, very respectfully, your obedient servant, 

CHARLES F. SIBBALD. 
Hon. John Cranch, ^ 

Secretary of the Navy, > 
Washington. ) 

No answer whatever was received to this letter ; but the 
course which the government pursued, notwithstanding it was 
addressed to them, will be seen by the following testimony : 

THOMAS DOUGLASS, Esq., District Attorney, page 178. 

To the fifth interrogatory the witness answers, that a Mr. 
Grice, whom witness understood was from Philadelphia, on one 
occasion told this witness, that he had made a contract with said 
Sibbald for a quantity of live oak timber, then on the 4000 acre 
tract, at Mosquito, and asked him (witness) whether it would 
be safe for him to cut timber there under that contract, and 
witness recollects having told Mr. Grice, that the tract had 
not been confirmed, and if he attempted to cut, he (the witness) 
should feel bound, from the instructions he had then lately re- 
ceived from the government, to institute a suit against him. — 
Witness alludes in that conversation, to instructions received by 
him from George Graham, Esq., Commissioner of the General 
Land Office, bearing date August 14th, 1828, a copy of which 
is herewith enclosed, from which it will appear, that all lands 
claimed under Spanish grants then remaining unconfirmed, were 
considered public lands, and to be treated accordingly; this 
witness understood, that said Grice, notwithstanding the advice 
he gave him, proceeded to Mosquito for the purpose of cutting 
timber off" said 4000 acre tiact, and that said William D. Acken, 
Esq., interfered, and, as witness believes, prevented him.. 

As Mr. Acken says (at page 67,) he never was at Mosquito, 
Mr. Douglass must, of course, have meant Mr. Mason, who was 
agent when Mr. Grice went there. 

Thus the contracts were destroyed and lost — the mills aban- 
doned, " delapidated, rusted out, and rotted down." The 
claimant prostrated, ruined and overwhelmed in difficulty. 



101 

In accordance with this is the following, which arose from a 
very imjiortant question, asked by the Solicitor of the Trea- 
sury in the interrogatory on behalf of the United States, and 
shows how just he deemed the claim. 

Eighth interrogatory on the part of the United States, — Was 
the said Sibbald's property attached by his creditors, or was 
other legal process served on it in consequence of the embar- 
rassments brought upon him by any act of the government t 

Captain Charles Snowden replied : 

Legal process was served on the mills by the workmen on 
the premises, entirely owing, as I believe, to the embarrassments 
brought on him by the government of the United States. 
I believe these liabilities did not exceed $4000. Evidence, 
page 15. 

Colonel Lewis Fleming replied : 

That said Sibbald's property was attached by several of 
his creditors, and w'itness believes that the embarrassment of 
Mr. Sibbald, which occasioned these writs of attachment to be 
issued, was the consequence of the acts of the government of 
the United States and their agents, in depriving him of the 
use of his timber, and thereby cutting oft' his resources and 
diminishing his credit. Evidence, page 131. 

Farquhar Bethune, Esq., a planter, residing in the vicinity of 
the mills in Florida, answered : 

That Mr. Sibbald's mills were attached in 18.30, by his cre- 
ditors, for an amount quite inconsiderable, (about $4000 — See 
Evidence, p. 15) when compared with the value of the property ; 
and in consequence of embarrassments brought upon him by the 
agents of the government of the United States, who deprived 
him of the means he relied on to meet his engagements. Evi- 
dence, page 137. 

Most of the witnesses have answ^ered this question to the same 
effect — but this is a sufficient illustration. 

" The agents of the government of the United States," says 
the last witness mentioned, " deprived him of the means he re- 
lied on to meet his engagements;" and the former witness re- 
plied, " the United States cutting off" his resources and dimin- 
ishing his credit ;" here then, in a short sentence, is a complete 
explanation on this subject. 

Thus is exhibited the action of the government of the United 



102 

States, in taking from this claimant the entire use, control, ben- 
efit and possession of a Spanish grant in Florida, which the Su- 
preme Court has declared was protected and confirmed on the 
instant ratification of the treaty with Spain, and thereby con- 
summating his ruin, in compelling him to suspend payment, (in 
the year 1830) and causuig the entire destruction of his saw 
mills and the extensive business therewith connected. As soon 
as the failure of this claimant was known in Florida (see Evi- 
dence, page 182) " attachments were taken out against his 
mills" by the persons employed at them; " that the mills are at 
this time worth little or nothing," that they may be said to be 
in the custody of the United States nrarshall, and have been 
permitted to dilapidate, — to rust out, and rot down. See Evi- 
dence of Hon. J. L. Doggett on the part of the United States, 
page 205. 

These are the most expressive words which have been used 
in exhibiting the close of this destruction. See now those ruins, 
yet belonging to this claimant, where he had been stimulating 
to industry, hundreds of individuals, and where "he had blended 
the useful arts of life with active commerce," (Evidence, page 
152) in such an extensive business. 

Mr. George Colt, a book-keeper at the mills, and now a plan- 
ter in the island of Cuba, answered : 

That Mr. Sibbald was dispossessed of his lands and prevent- 
ed from using them from the year 1828 to the year 1836, when 
his title to the land was confirmed by the Supreme Court of the 
United States. He was dispossessed by Mr. William D. Acken. 
Mr. Joseph E Eioomfield withdrew a loan in consequence, to- 
gethei- with many other mercantile houses in New York, Boston 
and Philadelphia, from which houses he was enjoying very ex- 
tensive credits, all of which were predicated on his lands in 
Florida. He was further deprived of resources which he might 
have derived from 5000 acres of lands particularly adapted to 
the growth of sugar cane, and the abundant growth of live oak 
timber upon them. All these resources of profit and peculiar 
advantage he was deprived of by the di?-ect interference of the 
officers and assents of the <T0vernment of United States. 

I was familiar with Mr. Sih'oald's business transactions from 
1829 to 1835. I know that the government agent, Mr. Acken, 
visited Mr. Sibbaid's mills in person, and then forbid Mr. Sib- 
bald's a^ent (Mr. C. Snowden) from cutting any timber uporj 
that tract ; and also forbid a person by the name of Price (who 
was there cutting timber for the consumption of the mills) from 



103 

cutting more ; and if they presisted in cutting, he would punish 
them or any other person that iniwht attempt to cut timber upon 
that grant, to the fullest extent of the law. I believe Mr. Sib- 
bald to have been induced to undertake that business in Florida, 
exclusively looking to this property as the basis of his support; 
and which was throughout treated as the public property of the 
United States, until the final confirmation of it to him in Feb- 
ruary, 1836, by the Supreme Court. See Evidence, p 117, 
118. See also Evidence of John Gibson, Esq., p. 25, in reply 
to the same interrogatory. 

Mr. Colt says, " I believe Mr. Sibbald to have been induced 
to undertake that business in Florida, exclusively looking to this 
. property as the basis of his support ; and which was throughout 
treated as the public property of the United States." Does such 
a development of facts, with such a bearing on the subject mat- 
ter, need any comment 1 

Extract of a letter from Joseph E. Bloomfield, Esq., merchant 
of New York, on file with the other papers, submitted to the 
Committee of Claims. 

" I have no hesitation in stating, that it was the interference 
of the government agent with your property, and rights to cut 
saw logs, as well as to comply with your contract with Mr. 
Grice, to cut live oak off your land, that prostrated your credit, 
and finally was the means of ruining you. It is true, that I "rant- 
ed you large facilities and acceptances, on the faith of your con- 
tract with Mr. Grice. My personal knowledge of the perseve- 
rance of this gentleman, and investigating your rights under the 
provincial government of Florida, with my favorable opinion of 
your correctness and integrity, under the introduction of (then) 
Messrs. Bevan &, Porter. I have not my books to refer to, but 
these advances and acceptances often exceeded fifteen thousand 
dollars. On the faith of your steam saw mills being able to 
furnish timber, as I had heard through other channels besides 
yourself, that the mills worked well, and I will add, the confi- 
dence I reposed in your energy of character, I built and sent out 
the brig Soto, Captain R. Ricketson, for the trade, to encounter 
the mortification to receive, after a long delay and detention, a 
partial cargo of sawed plank ; and it is true, you were obliged 
to put in the live oak frame of a small brig to fill up, which was 
sold at a great sacrifice. 

I was entirely deprived of and disappointed in receiving any 
relief and remittances under your contract with Mr. Grice, and 
it was Capt. Ricketson and other reports to me, of the difficul- 



104 

ties you had to encounter with the government agents, in get- 
ting saw logs, that determined me to cut clear from you. 

Your prospects were certainly brilliant, even after your first 
mill was burned down. Your friends appeared to rally to give 
you new facilities, and it was the confidence and trust reposed in 
you by Messrs. Rush & Muhlenburg, of Philadelphia, at this 
period, that determined me to apply to you the insurance I re- 
ceived, $7500, to set your second mill in operation. With all 
your prospects they were certainly good to ensure a rapid for- 
tune, only for the interference of the government agents with 
your property." 

But it is not from Mr. Acken's acts alone, nor Mr. Mason's» 
nor Mr. Douglass's, nor Mr. Rodman's, or the other officers, but 
the entire proceeding of the government, in keeping him out of 
his property from 1828 until 1836 — not permitting his titles to 
be brought to trial, for which he founds his claim for indemnity, 
and looks for complete reparation. 

The Solicitor of the Treasury enquires in his fifteenth inter- 
rogatory : Did, or did not, any other cause exist, for the destruc- 
tion of the business of the said Charles F. Sibbald, except the 
interposition of the agents and officers of the government? 

Answer of John Rodman, Esq., the Collector of the Customs 
at St. Augustine. 

To the fifteenth cross interrogatory, I answer, that I never 
heard or believed that any other cause than the one above men- 
tioned, viz., the interference with the just, fair and reasonable 
claim of Mr. Sibbald to the 16,000 acres of land, granted to him 
by the Spanish government; said tract being clearly embraced 
by the 8th article of the Treaty of 1819 with Spain, — ever pro- 
duced any loss or damage to Mr. Sibbald in his mercantile or 
other business. (Evidence, page 158. 

Samuel Grice, Esq., of Philadelphia, answered: 
I do not know, or believe that any other cause existed for the 
destruction of the business of Charles F. Sibbald, except the in- 
terposition of the officers and agents of the United States, as 
aforesaid. (Evidence, page 34.) 

William L. Newbold, Esq., of Philadelphia, answered: 
No other cause whatever, that I am aware of, existed, for the 
destruction of the business of the said Charles F. Sibbald, ex- 
cept the interposition of the agents or officers of the government 
of the United States. (Evidence, page 54.) 



105 

Farquhar Bethune, Esq., a planter, residing on the St. Johns, 
near the mills, an3^vered: 

That he knows of no other cause for the destruction of Chas. 
F. Sibbald's buoiness, than the interference of the government 
of the United States, who deprived him of the means to which 
he had the most undoubted right. (Evidence, page 141.) 

This witness also answered at page 137, (see Evidence) that 
the acts of the government or its agents, were in his (witness's) 
opinion, the direct cause of Mr. Sibbald's embarrassments, that 
deprived him of his means, and destroyed his credit, inducing 
merchants at the North who supported him, to believe that the 
lands were not his, operating most injuriously, not only on his 
credit, but his character. 

Col. William J. Mills: 

I did know several commercial houses in Boston, New York 
and Philadelphia, with whom Mr. Sibbald enjoyed extensive 
credits, that withdrew them from the causes referred to. Mr. 
Sibbald has suffered immense losses from the measures adopted 
by the officers of the government, the precise amount of loss I 
cannot at this time estimate; he has been effected by it ever 
since, as I am informed at Philadelphia. I know of no other 
cause. When his mill was stopped, it caused distrust in the 
minds of his creditors, and caused them to withdraw any further 
accommodation. (Page 146.) I believe I have stated all I 
know of this matter. This subject has been one of great and 
exciting interest in East Florida, and considered a high-handed 
measure on the part of the United States, and Mr. Sibbald's 
claim to large damages universally admitted. (Page 143.) 

After giving the following part of the deposition of William 
L. Haskins, the first agent of claimant, to show of the actual 
seizure of a vessel taking timber from a Spanish grant, we will 
conclude this part of the testimony. 

That deponent transacted business, commencing in the au- 
tumn of 1828, and for several years afterwards in Middle Flo- 
rida, residing at Magnolia, on the river St. Marks. That on his 
first arrival at Magnolia in the autumn of 1828, or a few days 
afterwards, deponent, in conjunction with his partner in trade, 
carrying on business under the firm of William L. Haskins & 
Co., purchased at a Marshal's sale, the hull, tackle and apparel 
of a brig of about 160 tons burthen, called the " Planter," which 
brig, together with a quantity of live oak timber laden on board 
of her, and a further quantity lying in the woods, more than 

14 



106 

sufficient to complete the cargo of said brig, had been seized, 

adjudicated and condemned by authority of the government of 
the United States, for an alleged violation on the part of the 
owners or charterers of said brig, of the laws of the United 
States, in that the said owners or charterers of the said brig 
Planter, had proceeded and commenced to load their said brig 
with live oak timber, and had cut said live oak timber upon and 
within the tract of land bordering upon said river St. Marks, 
known as the Forbes purchase or grant, which said Forbes pur- 
chase or grant has been subsequently, by the Supreme Court of 
the United States, confirmed to the claimants. 

That said William L. Ilaskins & Co., after purchasing said 
brig as aforesaid, contracted as owners of said brig Planter with 
the Marshal of the United States, to carry said live oak timber 
then on board of said brig, and to receive on board the balance 
then in the woods, or as much of it as they, the owners of said 
brisr, might choose to receive on board, for account of the I'nited 
States government, and to deliver the same to the Navy Agent 
at the Navy Yard at the port of Norfolk, there to receive freight 
therefor as agreed upon. That said William L. Haskins&Co., 
did receive said live oak timber on board said brig Planter for 
account of the government of the United States, and did deliver 
the same agreeably to contract to the agents of the government 
of the United States, at the Navy Yard at Norfolk. 

That from these acts, so well known to deponent, from his in- 
timate connection with them, or with some of them, from his 
general knowledge of the country, and from current report, he, 
deponent, believes that after he left Panama, said Sibbald was 
prevented from carrying on his business of sawing, ship build- 
ing, and its collateral branches, by the acts of the government 
of the United States, which acts cut off the very root of his en- 
terprise, in depriving him of timber, that formed the very ground 
work of his operations, and that timber his own, acquired by 
just title, as the Courts of the United States have since decided, 
but which he could not, and dare not cut and load, on pain of 
confiscation of vessel and cargo, — thus putting at once a period 
to the business, and, as a natural consequence, in the incipient 
state of that business, an end to his credit. 

That deponent verily believes, from an intimate acquaintance 
with the rise, progress, and decline of the enterprise coinmenced 
by said Sibbald in Florida, in 1827. that his failure to continue 
that business since deponent left Panama, is to be ascribed to 
the illegal, oppressive, and unjust course in relation to uncon- 
firmed grants of land in Florida, pursued by the government of 
the United States. (See testimony of William L. Haskins.) 



107 

It appears needless to extend the testimony upon this point. 

Let us now suppose that one of our public vessels of war 
should be ordered on the high seas, to drive a vessel from her 
course, that was pursuing a lawful trade. She follows her up, 
in a little while she disables her. and takes from her some of her 
sails, by which alone she is enabled to reach her destined port. 
She meets her again, and takes the remainder, and so disables 
her that she is left for near a year to drift at the mercy of the 
wind and waves. But the mariner, seeing his inevitable doom, 
if he is ship-wrecked, contends with his difficulties, toils on, to 
save his frail bark, that has been rendered a wreck almost, by 
the strong arrq. of a powerful government — he battles with the 
storm — he calls aloud to his destroyer yet to come to rescue 
him — he will not heed, and the mariner is cast on shore and 
shipwrecked, and is left for years to struggle with his difficul- 
ties. The government takes his all, and compels him to pay 
usury often to the extent of three per cent, per month on the 
amount illegally taken or destroyed, and withholds it until 
twenty thousand dollars of the sum which you have detained or 
destroyed, say for 14 years, amounts, compounded, to a million, 
in interest alone; Let no one be staggered at this assumption 
of interest compounded — but let them calculate it. Has not the 
claimant been compelled to pay thus. Let the officers of the 
Treasury look at this — let them look at this, we say, and ask 
them to take this picture of the shipwrecked mariner before 
them, and w^ould you not pay this mariner or owner to the last 
cent of his losses. Would you not also pay this immense loss of 
compound interest thus forced upon the claimant ? Is not bear- 
ing the burthen of this load for fourteen years sufficient punish- 
ment to inflict ? Is the compounded interest not an injury 
flowing " immediately or directly from the wrong?" Is it not 
a loss thus created by the wrong of the government ? Will 
there be " indemnity awarded as the legislature means," with- 
out reparation of this immense item of loss? 

Suppose we place the claimant's lands for a moment in the 
District of Columbia; place his 25 square miles, "The Mill 
Tract," at the Capitol, with its forest grounds ; the live oak 
tracts, or " Mosqueto," around the Treasury itself, with their 
forest trees; the other tract at the General Post Office. 

We place them thus, that the circumstances may be brought 
to view. The owner of the District of Columbia, Spain, cedes 
the District to the United States. The United States by a so- 
lemn treaty promise to respect and protect this private proper- 
ty, and this landed right of an individual ; but you violate both 



108 

the treaty and constitution, dispossess him, and seize his pro- 
perty. 

The owner of this estate resides in Philadelphia ; he sends 
steam engines, equipments of all kinds, and mechanics of all 
kinds requisite, and puts up an immense concern on the ground 
of the Capitol, mills, ship-building and stores; buys vessels to 
carry on his undertakings, and is on the full tide of prosperity, 
cutting his timber of every kind, sawing, building vessels, vend- 
ing goods, buying cotton and other produce. All at once you 
interfere with him, when he is cutting live oak at the Presi- 
dent's grounds — you drive off his people, and keep him from 
taking sixteen thousand dollars, as he contracted with Mr. 
Grice, from his property, simultaneously with which you see 
him erecting immense mills at the Capitol, dependent on sawing 
his pine timber, he has invested a vast sum, positively and sole- 
ly depending upon the continued free use and enjoyment of his 
property, upon which he is carrying out the very intentions and 
stipulations of his grant as made by Spain — the agents of the 
government come upon his property, over and over again, drive 
his agents and labourers from his forests, where they are cutting 
his pine mill logs, actually seize the same, and compel the aban- 
donment of the entire property — his mills and all other improve- 
ments are wasted and destroyed, and the claimant thus prostrated 
and overwhelmed in ruin. You have seen him appealing and ap- 
plying to almost every department of the government to save 
him, and every application totally disregarded. To add to this 
aggravation you leave him overwhelmed in difficulty for many 
years, whilst you compel him to try his own titles to his own 
lands ; you prevent a decision for several years in the Courts, 
thus throwing discredit upon his title — declaring them " Public 
Lands," until finally he is enabled to reach that tribunal which 
guards every private right, that weighs and deals out justice to 
all men, which declares that your title was valid, and ratified 
simultaneously with the treaty with Spain. 

Then let this comparison be made, and where will the mea- 
sure of justice stop? JiCt the testimony and facts of the case 
be examined, where is the hand that will not help to aid Aim, 
that has thus suffered 1 

And the following is given as proof, to show that up to the 
last moment, prior to the decision of the Supreme Court, the 
claimant was prevented from the entire use of his property in 
Florida. Previous to the receipt of the letter that follows, he 
had, however, made contracts to supply live oak frame timber 
from his lands for seven ships of the line, frigates, sloops of 
war, etc. 



109 

L. B. B.— folio 460. 

Extract of a letter from Charles F. Sibbald to John Rodman, 
Esq., his Attoeney at St. Augustine, and Collector of the 
Customs of that port, dated 

Philadelphia, Nov. 4th, 1836. 
I have it in contemplation to take a contract from the gov- 
ernment for some live oak frames. Please to inform me whe- 
ther there would be any probability of the government agent 
attempting to stop my cutting my own timber at Mosquito be- 
fore a final decision against me, or would there be any difficulty 
in getting a clearance from the custom house. 

Extract of a letter from John Rodman, Esq., Collector of the 
Customs at St. Augustine, and counsellor at law, dated 

St. Augustine, 20th Nov. 1835. 
With regard to your inquiry respecting the Citting of live oak 
timber, you cannot tut a stick of it on any of the laud which you 
claim, until the grant be finally confirmed in Court. My orders 
on that subject from the Treasury Department are express, to 
stop and seize all timber cut, and attempted to be transported 
from public land, or any the grant for lo.ich has not yet been 
confirmed by the United States. 

The Supreme Court has declared that the lands of the claim- 
ant were confirmed " presently on the ratification of the treaty." 
(See Peters' Rep., 6 v. page 742, Arredondo vs. the U. States.) 
The court, after going into an elaborate argument, showing the 
rights of claimants under the treaty between Spain and the 
United States, concludes thus : 

" For these reasons and in this conviction, we consider the 
grants were confirmed and annulled respectively — simultane- 
ously with the ratification of the treaty, and that when the ter- 
ritory was ceded, the United States had no right in any of the 
lands embraced in the confirmed grants." 



&' 



And now it is respectfully submitted upon a review of this 
whole matter, as thus given, whether the report made by Con- 
gress is not fully sustained 1 Is that report then not binding 
authority 1 Is it not thus proved that the flame kindled at that 
day, by " the agents of the United States acting under their 
authority," against the property of the claimant, has been burn- 
ing and consuming ever since, as if in fact, daily, perpetually 



no 

since that fatal blow was levelled against him — it was thus actu- 
ally consuming so much property. Look at his losses. Look at 
the destruction of his mills and other property. Look at his 
payment of interest, accumulating and compounding daily. 
Look at the sacrifices forced upon him to pay creditors, created 
by the inordinate acts of the government. Look at his suffer- 
ings and his daily toil in endeavoring to ward off the difficulty 
brought upon him — the insupportable, the inconceivable, the in- 
credible difficulties of meeting the consequences in every way, in 
every possible shape, thus brought upon him by the government, 
while pursuing the lawful exercise of his rights. And this state- 
ment cannot be better closed than by supporting it with the fol- 
lowing, emanating from the law givers, showing " the view with 
which they reported the bill" for his relief, they say " the whole 
case has again came up before this Committee, and from the ex- 
amination they have been enabled to bestow upon it, they deem 
the following facta established. 

" That the petitioner iras the owner, and entitled to the full , 
free, a'td U7i interrupted use and enjoyment of his landed estate 
in Florida, at the time of the cession of that territory to the 
United States. That he so continued the owner, and in quiet 
and peaceable possession thereof, until he was disturbed, as 
hereinafter notified; that his lands were well supplied with yel- 
low pine, red cedar and live oak, in detached parcels. That he 
erected extensive steam saw mills, to saw his pine timber; made 
extensive contracts with one Samuel Grice, and subsequently 
with the Navy Department, for a supply of live oak; thus to 
bring into profitable use, divers portions of these lands; and 
had, in connection with these operations, other business to a 
large extent. That the officers of the United States having in 
charge the preservation of the timber on the public lands in that 
Territory, and preventing the trespasses thereon, a' ting under 
orders of the Treasurij and Navy Departments, deemed and treat- 
ed the lands of the petitioner as public lands, directly interjered, 
and "prevented him, or those acting for him, from cutting or using 
his own titnber; either foi supplying his mdls, or fulfdling his 
live oak contracts. That being thus prevented from the lawful 
use and enjoyment of his property, his credit, based upon its 
value and ready resuurces therefrom, became impaired ; his bu 
siness affairs (which were very extensive) became embarrassed, 
and after praiseworthy efforts to relieve himself from his pecu- 
niary difficulties; he was compelled to yield to the circumstan- 
ces surrounding him, and throw himself upon the mercy of his 
creditors. His creditors immediately sued out attachments 
against him, and his mills, erected at an immense expense, and 



Ill 

his other property in Florida, were taken possession of by the 
United States Marshal, in whose hands they have perished by 
dilapidation and decay." 

" The orders and instructions under which the govr mment 
agents acted, were made to extend to all unconfirmed Spanish 
grants; and the construction put upon them by the agents, seems 
to have been concurred in, and ion firmed by the Executice De- 
partments, as they were fully advised of the conduct of their 
agents on the premises, and repeatedly and earnestly called upon 
by the petitioner to modify their instructions, and to interfere and 
prevent the loss which nou d result to him therefiom. They were 
issued, doubtless, for the laudable object of protecting the pub- 
lic lands from injury and spoliation, especially the live oak, so 
necessary for the navy. Still, however, if in thus protecting 
the interest of the United States, an individual, like the peti- 
tioner, has been seriously injured, the obligation to make him 
reparation, is not weakened thereby." 

" The act of the authorized agent or agents being approved by 
the government, it must be considered their act, — and the injury, 
if any, to the petitioner, must be responded to by them.^^ 

" In this view of the case, the Committee have found no diffi- 
culty in coming to the conclusion, that the damages which the 
petitioner actually sustained, by reason of the interference of the 
government, by their agents, with the use, possession or enjoy- 
ment of his property in Florida, when ascertained on principles 
of Law and equity, according to a true construction of the tes- 
timony submitted, should be paid to him, and with this view, 
they report a Bill," &c. 

This is the Report of the Committee on Claims to the House 
of Representatives — where the case oi'iginated — where for seve- 
ral years it was elaborately examined — and where the evidence 
was obtained, by their Resolutions to the Secretary of the Trea- 
sury. The Committee is known to be one of the most respecta- 
ble, and composed of nine members. It unanimously reported 
these, as the facts of the case, to the House, and the House 
unanimously passed their Bill. 

The following, taken from the opinion of the Honourable 
George M. Dallas upon the case, may be advantageously brought 
to view here. 

Mr. Dallas says — 

" The facts are clearly established. It is impossible to ex- 
amine your documents, and retain a doubt, that while the owner, 
and in peaceable possession of very valuable property, the title 



112 

to which has received the emphatic confirmation by the Supreme 
Court of the United States, and while actively enajaged at vast 
cost, and under large responsibilities, in making your estate pro- 
ductive, you were interfered with by the officers and agents of 
government. Your lands claimed as public lands, your opera- 
tions of business prohibited and arrested, your contracts defeat- 
ed, your capital vested in machinery, buildings, or equipments, 
wasted and sunk, and every arrangement and enterprise begun, 
or contemplated, totally subverted and destroyed. The evi- 
dence is conclusive to show, that by the interference stated, and 
without the slightest misconduct of your own, an unquestiona- 
ble basis of means and credit, alike solid and extensive, was 
swept from under you, and your condition was changed from 
one of actual and augmenting wealth, to one of ruin and pover- 
ty. These are facts, I say, clearly and positively proved." 

Then what is the law upon these facts ? What is the mea- 
sure of the damage 1 

The Attorney-General has said, " ivhat the legislature means 
is indemnity." 

" The damages to be such as the claimant would be entitled 
to recover upon the principles of law as applicable to other 
cases, and such as directly flow in the natural and ordinary 
course of things from the trespass or omission." 

And in that important case of damages, so very appropriate, 
Randall vs. Ches. and Delaware Canal Company, Judge Har- 
rington charged the jury as follows : 

" It embraces an enquiry into legal rights growing out of con- 
tract, into alleged wrongs, for the violation of those rights, dam- 
age and loss resulting from such wrongs, and compensation 
therefor. The jury are bound to make the plaintiff whole, to 
weigh out to him, as it were, from the scales of justice, remune- 
ration and compensation for his wrongs," 

" The only guide the Court can give you on this subject is 
the legal rule, — that whatever loss or damage naturally or im- 
mediately results from the wrong complained of, the wrong 
doer is bound to compensate." (Harrington's Reports, 1 v. p. 
307, 316. 

According to this, and many precedents cited by the claim- 
ant, and his counsel, he has submitted his accounts, which how- 
ever large, are believed to be fully sustained by the measure of 
damages, which justice never shortens, if the rule be properly 
applied, however extensive it may prove. 



113 

The following are the items of account for which the claim- 
ant seeks indemnity or reparation of loss : 

First. Loss of his steam saw mills, destroyed by dilapidation 
and decay. 

Second. Loss of the use and profits of the same to the present 
time. 

Third. Loss of the use and profits of Woodworth's patent 
planing machines. 

Fourth. Loss of his store business, stopped by the govern- 
ment. 

Fifth. Loss of the live oak contract with Samuel Grice, Esq., 
for the frame timber for a ship of the line, a frigate, and sloop of 
war. 

Sixth. Loss and injury sustained by stopping claimant's con- 
tracts with the Navy Department for two ships of the line, two 
frigates, two sloops of war and a schooner, of live oak. 

Seventh. Loss of ship building commenced. 

Eighth. Loss of trade with Cuba, with vessels under Spanish 
colours, commenced. 

Ninth. Loss and injury to his commercial credit, together 
with interest on these items, yearly, as they would be made. 

The claimant now, therefore, respectfully submits his case to 
the Honourable the Attorney General of the United States, in 
whom is reposed the execution of the law passed for his relief, 
and who has been mutually delegated by himself and the law 
givers of the country, the latter of whom have authorized and 
empowered him to "direct" that every law applicable, shall be 
applied to his relief. He therefore prays reference to his docu- 
ments and the execution of this law, and that such further di- 
rections shall be given upon the matters of law or matters of 
fact as may be deemed necessary, and in accordance therewith, 
and also with the report of Congress which accompanied the 
bill of the ''facts," which they therein declared and "deemed to 
be established." He respectfully, earnestly, and confidently ap- 
peals to the Attorney General to protect and save him from 
further loss ; from the injury and the persecution he is exposed 
to in further delay, and the consequences thereof, by directing 
an immediate settlement of his damages, pursuant to the bill 
passed for his "relief" 

CHARLES F. SIBBALD. 

Philadelphia, January 19th, 1844. 

15 



LB Mr TO 



